t
ARAMAIC PAPYRI
OF THE
FIFTH CENTURY B.C.
UcLAra m
ARAMAIC r PYRI
OF THE
FIFTH CENTURY B.C.
EDITED, WITH TRANSLATION AND NOTES.
BY
A. COWLEY
522357
M - s s'
OXFORD
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
1923
Oxford University Press
London Edinburgh Glasgow Copenhagen
New York Toronto Melbourne Cape Town
Bombay Calcutta Madras Shanghai
Humphrey Milford Publisher to the UNIVERSITY
Printed in England
PREFACE
No apology need be made for re-editing these texts, for every
fresh examination sheds fresh light on them, and in spite of the
very extensive literature to which they have given rise, much
still remains to be done. Moreover, it is obviously convenient
to have them all collected in one volume and arranged as far as
may be chronologically. Professor Sachau himself suggested
to me in 19 12 that we should collaborate on a new edition,
and in 19 13, with this object in view, I began to make a careful
study of the facsimiles and of the articles and reviews which
had appeared up to that time. During the war I continued
the work, with many interruptions, as far as the anxieties of
the time allowed. It no doubt shows many inconsistencies
for that reason. I had originally intended going to Cairo and
Berlin when the work was more advanced, to verify some of
the readings on the originals, and to discuss difficulties with
Professor Sachau. As this was impracticable, the present edition
has been finished without that advantage. Fortunately, however,
the previous editions contain such excellent facsimiles of all the
texts (except nos. 79, 80, 83) that it was possible to work on
them with confidence, and it was unnecessary to re-issue
facsimiles with this volume.
As a first result of the revision of the texts, I published in
1919 translations of thirty-six of the most important of them,
together with the ' Words of Ahikar ' and the fragments of
a version of the Behistun inscription {Jeivish Documents of the
time of Ezra, London, SPCK., 1919). The present volume
contains the Aramaic texts from which these translations were
made, together with others, and a commentary in support of
2699
vi PREFACE
the readings and interpretations adopted. Consideration of
expense has obliged me to restrict the commentary so that
many interesting questions have been left undiscussed. Further
treatment of many of these will, however, be found in the special
articles to which reference is made.
I acknowledge gratefully the help obtained from Sachau's
original edition, and from Ungnad's small edition, though often
differing from both of them. I also wish to thank Mr. F. LI.
Griffith for help in matters relating to Egypt, Professor Langdon
and Mr. G. R. Driver for help in Assyriological questions, and
the staff of the Clarendon Press for the care they have bestowed
on the production of the book.
A. COWLEY.
Magdalen College, Oxford,
January, 1923.
CONTENTS
PAGE
LIST OF BOOKS AND ARTICLES . . viii
TABLE OF THE PAPYRI . xi
INTRODUCTION xiii
ARAMAIC PAPYRI: TEXTS i
INDEX OF WORDS AND NAMES . . 273
LIST OF BOOKS AND ARTICLES
The following are some of the books and articles which have been consulted,
besides those mentioned in the notes :
Anneler, Zur Geschichte d. Juden in Elephantine. (Diss.) Bern, 1912 (with
bibliography).
Arnold, Journal of Biblical Literature 1912, p. I (on pap. 21).
Barlh, Jahrbuch d. Judisch-Literarischen Gesellschaft 1907, p. 323 (on
Sachau's Urei aramaische Papyrus).
Revue Semitique 1907, p. 522 (on no. 15) ; 1909, p. 149 (on njx or 1JX).
Zeitschrift f. Assyriologie 1908, p. 188 (on pap. 30).
Orientalistische Litcraturzeitung 1912, p. 10.
Blau, Ma^yar-zsido Szemle 19 12 p. 41 ; 1 921, p. 44.
in Festschrift H. Cohen. Berlin, 1912, p. 207.
Bornstein in Festschrift Harkavy. St. Petersburg 190S, p. 63 Heb. (on dates).
Boylan, Irish Theological Quarterly 1912, p. 40.
Bruston, Revue de Theologie et de Philosophic 1908, p. 97.
Biichler, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 1912, p. 126 (on pap. 26).
Burney, Expositor 1912, p. 97.
Church Quarterly Review 74 (1912), p. 392.
Chabot, Journal Asiatique 14 (1909), p. 515 (on dates).
Clermont-Ganneau, Recueil d'Archeologie Orientale vi (1905), pp. 147, 221.
Revue Critique d'histoire 1906 (2), p. 341.
Cook (S. A.), American Journal of Theology 191 5, p. 346.
Expositor 1912, p. 193.
Cooke (G. A.), Journal of Theological Studies 1907, p. 615.
Daiches, Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie 1909, p. 197.
Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology 1912, p. 17.
Desnoyers, Bulletin de Litterature Ecclesiastique 1907, pp. 138, 176; 1908,
P- 235-
Doller, Theologische Quartalschrift 1907, p. 497.
Eerdmans, Theologisch Tijdschrift 1908, p. 72.
Elhorst, Journal of Biblical Literature 1912, p. 147.
Epstein (J. N.), Jahrbuch d. Judisch-Literarischen Gesellschaft 1909, p. 359.
Zeitschrift d. Alttestamentlichen Wissenschaft 1912, pp. 128, 139; 1913,
p. 138.
Fischer (L.), Jahrbuch d. Judisch-Literarischen Gesellschaft 191 1, p. 371
Heb. (on legal forms) ; 191 2, p. 45.
LIST OF BOOKS AND ARTICLES ix
Fotheringham, see Introduction, p. v, note 5.
Journal of Theological Studies 14 (1913), p. 570 (on dates).
Frankel, Zeitschrift f. Assyriologie 1908, p. 240.
Freund, Vienna Oriental Journal, or Wiener Zeitschrift f. d. Kunde d.
Morgenlands 1907, p. 169 (on pap. 15).
von Gall, Yortrage d. theologischen Konferenz zu Giessen 1912, no. 34.
van Gelderen, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 1912, p. 337.
Ginzel, Handbuch d. Chronologie ii, p. 45 ; iii, p. 375.
Gray (G. B.) in Studien Wellhausen, Giessen 191 4, p. 163 (on names).
Grimme, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 191 1, p. 529, (on Ahikar) ; 1912,
p. 11.
Guillaume, Expository Times 32 (192 1), p. ^yj.
Gunkel, Expositor 191 1, p. 20.
Gutesmann, Revue des Etudes Juives 53 (1907), p. 194 (on dates).
Halevy, Journal Asiatique 18 (1911), p. 658 ; 19 (1912), pp. 410, 622.
Revue Semitique 1911, p. 473 ; 1912, pp. 31, 153, 252.
Holtzmann, Theologische Literaturzeitung 191 2, p. 166 (on Sprengling,
AJSL 1911).
Hontheim, Biblische Zeitschrift 1907, p. 225 (on dates).
Jampel, Monatschrift f. d. Geschichte d. Judentums 1907. p. 617.
Jirku, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 1912, p. 247.
Knobel (E. B.), see Introduction, p. v, note 4.
Knudtzon, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 1912, p. 486 (on VT).
Koberle, Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift 1908, p. 173.
Lagrange, Revue Biblique 1907, p. 258; 1912, p. 575.
Leander, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 1 91 2, p. 151 (on j,-p).
Levi (Isr.), Revue des Etudes Juives 54 (1907), pp. 35, 153; 56 (190SI,
p. 161 ; 63 (1912), p. 161.
Lidzbarski, Ephemeris ii (1906), p. 210; iii (1909), p. 70; (1912), p. 23S.
Deutsche Literaturzeitung 1906, p. 3205 ; 1907, p. 3160; 191 1, p. 2966.
Mahler, Zeitschrift f. Assyriologie 1912, p. 61 (on dates).
Margolis, Jewish Quarterly Review, new series ii (1911-12), p. 419.
Meyer (Ed.), Sitzungsberichte d. k. Preussischen Akademie 191 1, p. 1026.
Der Papyrusfund von Elephantine. Leipzig. 1912.
Mittwoch in Festschrift A. Cohen. Berlin, 1912, p. 227.
Montgomery, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 19 1 2, p. 535 (on Ahikar).
Nau, Journal Asiatique 18 ( 191 1 ), p. 660.
Revue Biblique 1912, p. 68.
Noldeke, Zeitschrift f. Assyriologie 1907, p. 130 ; 1908, p. 195 (on pap. 30).
Literarisches Zentralblatt 191 1, p. 1503.
Peiser, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 1907, p. 622 ; 190S, pp. 24, 73 (on
Staerk).
Perles, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 1908, p. 26; 1911, p. 497! 1912,
p. 54.
Peters, Die judische Gemeinde von Elephantine . . . Freiburg i. Br. 1910.
x LIST OF BOOKS AND ARTICLKS
Pognon, Journal Asiatique 18 ( 1 91 1 ), p. 337 (on dates).
Poznanski (S.)j Zycie Zydowskie 1907 (nos. 13, 14), p. 219.
Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 192 1, p. 303.
Prasek, Orientalistische Litcraturzeitung 1912, p. 168 (on Sprengling AJSL
1911).
Pritsch, Zeitschrift 1. Assyriologie 1911, p. 345 (on pap. 20).
Sachau, Drei Aramaische Papyrusurkunden. Berlin, 1908.
in Florilegium de Vogue. Paris, 1909, p. 529 (on pap. 35).
Sayce, Expositor 191 1, pp. 97, 417.
Schultess, Gottingische Gelehrte Anzeigen 1907, p. 1S1.
Schiirer, Theologische Literaturzeitung 1907, pp. 1, 65.
Schwally, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 191 2, p. 160.
Seidel, Zeitschrift d. alttestamentlichen Wissenschaft 1912, p. 292.
Sidersky, Journal Asiatique 16 (1910), p. 587 (on dates).
Smyly, see Introduction, p. xiii, note 6.
Spiegelberg, Orientalistisclie Literaturzeitung 1913, p. 15: 1912, p. 1 (on
names).
Sprengling, American Journal of Semitic Languages 27 (191 1), p. 233.
American Journal of Theology 1917, p. 411 ; 1918, p. 349.
Staerk, Die jiidisch-aramaischen Papyri ... in Kleine Texte, nos. 22, 23.
Bonn, 1907, and no. 32, 1908.
Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 1908 (Beiheft).
Torczyner, Zeitschrift d. Deutschen Morgenliindischen Gesellschaft 1916,
p. 288 (bibliography).
Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 191 2, p. 397.
Ungnad, Aramaische Papyrus . . . kleine Ausgabe. Leipzig, 191 1.
de Vogiie, Comptes Rendus de l'Academie des Inscriptions 1906, p. 499.
Wensinck, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 191 2, p. 49 (on Ahikar).
TABLE OF THE PAPYRI
AS ARRANGED IN PREVIOUS EDITIONS, SHOWING THEIR
NUMBERS IN THIS EDITION.
Sayce and
Cowley
This
edition
A
no
5
B
6
C
9
D
8
E
13
F
14
G
15
H
20
J
25
K
28
L
I L'ngnad.
no. 88)
1 1
Sachau
Ur
ignad
This
edition
Plate
Papyrus
1,2
1
no
. 1
no. 30
3
2
2
3i
4
3
3
32
4
5
4
33
5
4
5
17
6
6
6
21
7
7
7
16
8,9
8
8
26
IO
9
9
36
1 1
10
10
37
12
11
11
38
15
12
12
39
13
14
13
40
14
13
14
41
'5
15
16
34
l5
29
IS
29
16
16
17
42
17
17
18
12
17-20
18
19
22
21, 22
19
20, 21
24
23
20
22
23
23
21
23
19
23
23
24
51
24
22
25
52
24
24
26
53
25,26
25
27
2
26
27
28
7
xii TABLE OF THE PAPYRI
s
achau
Ungnad This
edition
Plate
Papyrus
27
26
no
. 29 no
1
3
28, 29
28
30
10
30
30
31
I
31
31
32
46
32
32
33
44
32
36
34
45
33
35
43
33
34
36
18
34
35
37
j5
35
37
38
47
35
38
39
48
36
39
40
54
36
40
41
55
36
41
42
4
37
42
43
58
37
43
44
56
38
44
45
49
38
45
46
57
38
46
47
5o
39
47
48
60
39
47
49
59
40-50
49-59
50-63
Ahikar (pp. 212-20)
51
60
64
69' '
52, 54-
57
61, 62 &c.
65-68 D
Behistun (pp. 251-4,
53
61 rev.
69
63
55 col.
*■>
67, ii
61
56 rev.
68 E
62
57
70 15
64
58
71
65
59
72
66
60
73
67
61
74
68
75 (Euting's
papyrus)
2a
27
CIS
. ii. 1, no.
144
145
146
147
148
70
71
72
73
74
149 (Un
gnad, no. £4)
69
150
75
151
76
152
77
153
78
Un
gnad, no.
89
90
79
80
PSBAI907, p.
260
81
1915, P-
217
82
Harrow Papyrus
83
Giron's Papyrus
Appendix, p. 316.
265-9)
INTRODUCTION
The present volume comprises all the legible pre-Christian
Aramaic papyri known to me.1 The best preserved and the
most important are nos. 5, 6, 8, 9, ] i, 13-15, 20, 25. 28, published
by Sayce and Cowley in Aramaic Papyri Discovered at Assuan
(Condon, 1906); no. 27 published by Euting in Me" moires pre1 scute's
. . . a V Acctdimie des Inscriptions (Paris, 1903) ; and many of those
published by Sachau in Araindische Pafiynts . .-. (Leipzig, 191 1).
The rest are fragments from Sachau, some much mutilated texts
from the Corpus Iuscriptionum Semiticarum ii, 1, two others
published by me in PSBA 1907, p. 263 (with notes by Sayce),
and 1915, p. 217, and one fragment of accounts, not previously
published, which was brought to my notice by Mr. F. LI. Griffith,
in the Harrow School museum.2 The genuineness of the papyri
published by Sayce-Cowley and Sachau has been questioned :!
on the ground that the double dates in some of them do not
seem to be consistent. I do not propose to deal with the dates,
because they have been discussed by such competent authorities
as Mr. Knobel,4 Dr. Fotheringham,5 and Dr. Smyly,0 and the
possible errors are not a sufficient ground for condemning the
texts. A more serious attack has been made by Prof. Margo-
liouth,7 whose opinion deserves every consideration. His argu-
ments however have not gained acceptance, and a careful study
1 For a bibliography of the texts known up to 1906 see Seymour de Ricci in
Sayce and Cowley, p. 25. Some post-Christian pieces were published in the
Jewish Quarterly Review, xvi 1903% p. r.
■ The late Mr. B. P. Lascelles kindly procured photographs of this for me.
:! By L. Belleli in An Independent Examination . . . 1909, and by G. Jahn in Die
Elephantiner Papyri, 1913 ; reviewed by Rothstein in ZDMG 1913. p. 718, to
whom Jahn replied in ZDMG 1914, p. 142.
• Monthly Notices of the R. Astron. Soc., March 1908, p. 334, and Nov. 1908, p. 8.
5 Ibid., Nov. 1908, p. 12; March 1909, p. 446; June 1911, p. 661, against
Ginzel's Handbuch der . . . Chronologie ii (1911), p. 45.
c Proc. R. Irish Academy 1909, C, p. 235.
7 Expositor 1912, p. 69.
\iv INTRODUCTION
of the texts will furnish the unprejudiced reader with answers to
them.
The collection consists of letters, legal documents, lists of
names, accounts, and three literary pieces. Some of these are
complete, others are more or less fragmentary. A large propor-
tion of them are dated, unmistakably, and these have been
arranged here chronologically, so as to form an historical
sequence. In many cases the date is given both in the Egyptian
and the Jewish reckoning, and there may be errors in these
equations (see above, p. xiii). Some texts which are not dated
can be fitted into the sequence from their contents : others, which
give no certain clue as to date, are put at the end. The dated
texts cover practically the whole of the fifth century B.C., and on
palaeographical grounds the undated texts (with a few exceptions)
may be assigned to the same century. They thus confirm the
brilliant discovery of Mr. Clermont-Ganneau1 that the similar
texts in the CIS (which were all he had to go upon) belong
to the period of the Persian rule in Egypt. The exceptions are
nos. tfi-83, in a much later style of writing. Since, however, it
is unlikely that Aramaic continued in popular use in Egypt long
after the time of Alexander the Great, we may with some con-
fidence date these before or about 300 B.C.
The interest of documents such as these is that they are con-
temporary with the events to which they relate. They present
therefore a trustworthy picture of their surroundings, not dis-
torted by lapse of time, nor obscured by textual corruption.
These particular documents have the additional interest that
they were written by Jews. They are therefore the earliest
Jewish texjs_ we possess, with the exception ofjhe Siloam inscrip-
tion and the ostraka from Samaria, and (with those exceptions)
the only Jewish literature of so early a date, outside the Old
Testament. The literary pieces, it is true, are evidently of non-
Jewish origin, but they show nevertheless the kind of litera-
ture which was current in the community. And their interest
consists not only in what they say but in what they omit : in
1 'Origine perse des monuments arameens d'figypte', in the Rev. Archeol. New
Series 36 (1878), p. 93, and 37 (1879), p. 21.
INTRODUCTION x\
the light they give and in the darkness in which they leave us
(see below).
The language in which they are written is Aramaic, the same
(with some reservations) as that of parts of the book of Ezra.
Though there are Hebraisms in it and the names are Hebrew, '
there is no document in Hebrew, nor any direct evidence that
Hebrew was used by the community for any purpose. (But see
p. 119). As long as the Oriental empires continued to dominate
the civilized world, Aramaic was the language of commerce and
diplomacy, succeeded in Ptolemaic times by Greek. We have
proof of its use in Assyria in the ' dockets ' written in ink on the
edge of cuneiform tablets as early as the seventh century B.C.1
It was no doubt used even earlier, since Babylonian sculptures
show scribes writing on scrolls, which would not be used for
cuneiform, and it was not used only by Jews, nor (in this com-
munity) because it was in any sense a Jewish language. Assur-
banipal had Aramaean scribes in his employ, Darius apparently
sent abroad an Aramaic version of his great inscription at
Behistun, and (in no. 26) a Persian satrap sends his orders to an
Egyptian boat-builder in Aramaic.2 It was evidently also an
official language in the law-courts. It was only in Egypt, how-
ever, that papyrus could survive. Early documents on any such
material inevitably perished in the climate of Mesopotamia or
Palestine. In Egypt Aramaic probably gave way to Greek by
about 300 B.C. In the East it continued, gradually ^becoming
more_corrupt among the Jewish schools down to mediaeval
times. andJrLsome Christian communities to the present day.
The authors of most of these texts were Jews if names mean
anything — not Samaritans, as argued by Hoonacker 3 — nor
Israelites. They call themselves K'lVT 'the Jews', and their
community JPIIiV N^n 'the Jewish force'. Sometimes the term
^"ux is used, but no other designation is found, and the name
' See Clay, ' Aramaic Indorsements ', in O. T. Studies in Memory of IV. R. Harper
1908 , p. 285, and Delaporte, lipigraphes aram/etts, 1912, &c.
2 In Ezra 62 the official record of the decree of Cyrus was on a HPJJO (a scroll;
which probably implies Aramaic writing.
3 In his Schweich Lectures for 1914 | Une CommunauteJ udeoArameenne . . . ,
London, 1915).
xvi INTRODUCTION
Israel does not occur. These Jews seem to have been domiciled
specially in Elephantine. Other western Asiatics were settled in
Sycnc under the general name Aramaean. But 'Aramaean'
might also include Jews,1 so that we sometimes find a man
described in one place (correctly) as a Jew of Elephantine, and
in another (more loosely) as an Aramaean of Syene when he had
in some way become connected with that station. Three times
(252, &c.) we find an 'Aramaean of Elephantine', where the man
is evidently a Jew, but the description may be due to mere
carelessness. See on 52.
How did they get there? The Jewish force, or garrison, can
only have been a military settlement, and there was no doubt
likewise an Aramaean garrison at Syene. They were therefore
mercenaries in the employment of the Persian king. This is
corroborated by several indications. They were divided into
pn ' companies ' or ' regiments ', each bearing a name, Baby-
lonian or Persian, probably that of the commander.2 Another
division was ntino ' centuria ' (2219-20), but whether larger or, more
probably, smaller than the degel is not clear. They were under
the supreme command of the nttgi ' commander of the garrison ',
and they received rations (Nans, see e.g. 24s') and pay (D"id ii6,
Sic.) from the government.
The writer of the Letter of Aristeas mentions (§ 13) that
Psammetichus used Jewish mercenaries in his campaign against
Ethiopia. If this means Psammetichus ii (cf. Herodotus ii, 30)
their employment would have begun between 595 and 590 B.C.
—therefore just before the fall of Jerusalem and the beginning of
the Exile. They were afterwards apparently put in charge of
the fortresses of Elephantine and Syene as a defence of the
southern frontier of Egypt against Ethiopia, for when Cambyses
came into Egypt, in 525, they were already settled in Elephan-
tine (3013). With the passing of the government of Egypt, these
mercenaries must also have passed under Persian control
When these papyri begin, early in the fifth century, the colony,
while retaining its military organization, had become a settled
community. Its members could buy and sell land and houses,
1 Cf. Deut. 266 "3N 13K WK.
2 But see note on n[P-|]V s82, and on i?n, 52.
INTRODUCTION xvii
they engaged in trade, they could go to law before the civil
courts and they held civil posts under government. Moreover
they had their wives and families, and the women could hold
property and take legal action in their own right, and were even
reckoned as belonging to the degel, whether through their rela-
tion to the men, or independently, does not appear. We have
thus the outline of a picture of a Jewish community, its life and
manners, in the fifth (and sixth) century B.C., which is the more
valuable because it is not an intentional description, and therefore
need not be discounted as tendencieux. -r *»-/ ~-v*-vz- J^-*-vj \ 1,
They lived on equal terms with the Egyptians, transacted -^
business with people of various races, intermarried,1 and some-
times bore alien names (cf. OT names in -baal). But they
aroused anti-Jewish feeling, and suffered violence which they
ascribed, as always, and probably with as little reason then as
now, to hatred of their religion. No doubt their animal
sacrifices offended Egyptian susceptibilities, but much is also
to be ascribed to natural suspicion of a community with customs
differing from those of its neighbours, holding aloof from the
common pursuits of its fellow-citizens, and showing contempt
or hostility to everything outside itself. The great pogrom
described in nos. 27, 30-34 may have brought the colony to
an end.
The internal affairs of the community were directed by a
head-man with 'his colleagues the priests', very much as at the
present day by the chief rabbi and his beth-din. In the latter
part of the fifth century the chief man was Yedoniah b. Gemariah.
It was to him that the edict of Darius (no. 21) was addressed
in 419 ; it was he who received the contributions to the temple
funds (22120121) in the same year; it was he who drew up the
petition to the governor of Judaea (no. 30) in 408, and a similar
petition (no. 33) about the same time , and he was one of the
notable prisoners mentioned in no. 34 about 407 B.C. Whether '
he was a priest is not certain, but it is probable on general
grounds, and also from his connexion with religious affairs
(21, 22). At any rate he was politically recognized by the
Persian government.
1 But cf. introduction to no. 14.
xviii INTRODUCTION
But to most students of this dark period the papyri will be
chiefly valuable for the indications they give as to the state
of Jewish religion in the colony. It would no doubt be still
more interesting to have similar documents relating to Jerusalem
in the fifth century, or indeed any early century, but the state
of things in the colony may to some extent be taken to represent
what had been in Judaea before the days of Ezra. The colonists
were not better than their fathers —nor perhaps much worse.
To begin with, they regarded themselves as specially devoted
to the worship of the national God, whom they call in\ This
name, as I have argued elsewhere,1 is not an abbreviation of TOW,
but an earlier form, and only another way of writing the earliest
form v. As the n seems to be a mere vowel-sign, or perhaps
hamza, I have adopted here the transliteration Yau, as an
approximate pronunciation, rather than the customary Yahn or
Yeho, which are no forms. He is generally called, between Jews,
simply ' Ya'u the God' (1314, 221, 25°); in dealings with
Persians, ' the God of heaven ' or ' Ya'u the God of heaven '
(3021527 [but cf. 300-24-26], 323 [but cf. 33s] ), and often in letters.
Yet we also find other gods mentioned besides Ya'u. The
most explicit case of this is in 22123-125 where the temple-fund
is to be divided between Ya'u and 'Anathbethel in nearly equal
shares, and Ishumbethel who receives much less. In the law-
courts they swear usually by Ya'u, but in 44s an oath is recorded
' by the temple and by 'Anathya'u ', and in f' a man is challenged
to swear 'by Herembethel the god'. There are also personal
names like Heremnathan and Bethelnathan (184), formed like
the orthodox Jonathan and Elnathan. Whether other gods
were recognized besides these, whether these were all distinct
or e.g. 'Anathbethel was the same as 'Anathya'u, what was the
meaning of the various compounds, and what relation the dif-
ferent divinities bore to one another, the evidence does not show.
It would seem that besides Ya'u they recognized 'Anath, Bethel,
Ishum and Herem. There may have been others, but it is at
least a coincidence that we have the names of five gods and that
there were five gates to the temple (309).
1 JRAS 19*0. p. 175.
INTRODUCTION xix
Of these names 'Ajiath is known as that of a goddess in Syria A*q
and elsewhere, so that it has been suggested that 'Anathya'u was
intended as a consort of Ya'u — the Queen of heaven (Jer. 4417),
as He was the God of heaven. Bethel has long been recognized 3?
as an early Canaanite god (cf. Gen. $i13). These two therefore
may well have been brought by the colonists with them from
Judaea. It was not a case of falling away from a monotheistic
ideal, but a continuation of the pre-exilic popular beliefs. Ishum £jT*
(if that is the pronunciation of D"'N) may be the Babylonian
demorL-of— that- name, but it is also worth while to remember
the persistent tradition that the Samaritans worshipped a divinity
called Ashima, to whom it has been thought reference is made
in Amos 8U by a play on the word _not?M. If this was true in
the time of Amos, the tradition continued long after it had
ceased to be so, perhaps encouraged by the later Samaritan
pronunciation of noc ' the name' (which they still read instead
of nvr) as ashnia} Lidzbarski aiso_citesA fxojjTL_a_Iate__Syrian-
Greek inscription a god Svjx^ervXpv, whose name .looks xery like
Ishumbethel. Thus it seems probable that a god DBW was
worshipped in Syria and was brought by the colonists to Egypt
with the others.
As to Herem I have no_suggestion to make. ^e
Since these five gods are mentioned by name, there can be no
question that the word 80ri7X used in these texts, and sometimes
as subject to a verb in the plural, is to be taken as ' gods ' and
not as God (Nn?K) on the analogy of Hebrew. It is most often
found in the beginnings of letters : note especially 39/, and oddly
enough 212 in the edict about the Passover, from one Jew to
another. Further, in one place (145) a Jewess swears by Sati the
Egyptian goddess, in a transaction with an Egyptian.
It is thus evident that the description in Jeremiah (44s8 &c.) of
the religious practices of the Jews in Egypt in his time is in the
main corroborated by what we find in these texts a century later,
and the explanation is supplied by Jeremiah himself (4417). It
was no new heresy that they invented for themselves — people do
not invent much — but they did 'as we have done, we and our
fathers ... in the cities of Judah.' They took with them in all
*
1 See Cowley, Samaritan Liturgy (1909), p. xli.
2 Ephemeris iii (1912), p. 247.
b z
xx INTRODUCTION
sincerity the old religion of pre-exilic J udah, and continued to
practise it after the exile (and Ezra) had made it impossible
in the mother-country. Thus, as a picture not only of their
own time but also of pre-exilic Judaism — the religion against
which all the prophets protested— these papyri are specially
instructive.
Yet the national God was Ya'u. Whatever may have been
their doctrine as to his relation to the other gods, there is no
sort of doubt that he was pre-eminent. It was to him that
the temple belonged, although it seems that other gods were
also worshipped there. The temple of Elephantine was not
a mere synagogue, but a considerable building, with an altar
and all the appurtenances of sacrifice (309"12). It is called
NIUs* (meeting-place?) and N*nD» (place of worship), and is first
mentioned (1314) in 447. But it had been in existence at least
as early as 525 (3013'14). This is a very surprising fact, quite
contrary to the law of Deuteronomy (i25G &c). The case of
. the Onias-temple, built at Leontopolis about 154 B.C., was on
an altogether different footing. That was definitely schismatic,
and in whatever way the supporters of it might defend their
action, they knew at least that it required defence. The colonists
..of Elephantine had no such misgivings^.Aft.er their temple was
j\/l/Mdestroyed in a riot ofvthe Egyptiansl^4ii^hey sent a petition
^to the High Priest at Jerusalem, asking for help to rebuild it.
When this was disregarded (3o18-19), they appealed to the Persian
governor at Jerusalem. There is no hint of any suspicion that
the temple could be considered heretical, and they would surely
not have appealed to the High Priest at Jerusalem if they had
felt any doubt about it. On the contrary they give the impres-
sion of being proud of having a temple of their own, and as pious
devotees of Ya'u (no other god is mentioned in the petition)
seriously distressed at the loss of religious opportunities caused
by its destruction.
The explanation seems to be that in this respect, as in the
worship of strange gods, their practice was a continuation of that
of pre-exilic Judaism. It is now generally held that the book of
Deuteronomy was first promulgated under Josiah (about
621 B.C.). Previously, as we learn from e. g. the books of Samuel,
INTRODUCTION xxi
sacrifice was habitually offered at various places, and indeed until
the reign of Solomon no temple existed at Jerusalem l to mark it
out as the place which the Lord had chosen. It cannot be sup-
posed that the book of Deuteronomy was at once accepted
everywhere, even in Judaea, or that it at once put a stop to
popular practices which it condemned. Still less should we
expect these colonists if they left the country soon afterwards, or
perhaps were already abroad, to feel bound by the new and
stricter enactments. The exile followed in 588, breaking all
continuity, and Judaea was left without religious direction. We
need not wonder then that in the complete collapse of religious
institutions, the colonists, deprived of any central authority and
despairing of its restoration, decided to work out their own salva-
tion and naturally on the lines with which they were familiar.
What was their attitude towards the changes in Judaea, or
whether they knew of them, we cannot tell. They may even
have taken the view of Rabshakeh (2 Ki. 1822; cf. Elijah in
1 Ki. 1910), regarding the abolition of local sanctuaries as an act
of disrespect to Ya'u. But it is quite intelligible that the High
Priest took no notice of their appeal. We can also understand
why they afterwards wrote to the Persian governor, who had no
interest in Deuteronomy, and to the Samaritans, who interpreted
it in their own way, and that they received a reply.
On the persons concerned with the petition, and the difficulty
of reconciling various accounts of the history, see the introduction
to no. 30.
Before leaving the subject of the temple a word must be said
about the difficult passage in Isaiah iy19*, ' In that day shall
there be an altar to the Lord in i^tJiemidsLoXtheJanoLof Egypt, and
a pilkarjnjVPj^at the border thereof to the Lord ', &c. This has
generally been taken as a prophecy, before or after the event, of
the Onias temple, that having been hitherto the only foreign
temple known. It is dangerous to argue as if we knew all the
facts, for the passage might equally well refer to the temple at
Elephantine — on the border of Hyypt. Then the date of the
prophecy may be put considerably earlier than has been sup-
posed. It is in fact not unreasonable to suggest that it was
1 Ii must be remembered that the name dues not even occur in the Pentateuch.
xxii INTRODUCTION
written before the promulgation of Deuteronomy. If there was,
say just before 621, any considerable migration of Jews to Egypt,
the prophecy may have been intended as an encouragement to
the emigrants. ' Though you are leaving your native land, you
shall make a new home in Egypt and follow there the faith of
your fathers (Is. 1921). It is a great opportunity for you '. Note
also another strange coincidence, five gods, five gates of the
temple, and five cities speaking the language of Canaan.
Thus there are several indications that the colonists in the
fifth century B.C. remained at the same stage of religious develop-
ment (if that is what we ought to call it) as their fathers in Judaea
in the seventh century. It is consequently of particular interest
to collect from these papyri all possible evidence as to their
beliefs and practice, always remembering that in the course of
two centuries some things may have changed for better or worse.
Unfortunately the inquiry depends largely on an argumentum e
silentio, which must not be unduly pressed, since we cannot be
sure that what is not mentioned did not exist. Two thousand
years hence if a part of English literature exists, it might well be
a considerable part and yet contain no reference to King Alfred,
or the Norman conquest, or the Reformation, or the doctrines of
the Church, or to a number of questions which agitate us at the
present day.
We have positive evidence that sacrifices, including animal
sacrifices (mbjn ruoh nroD) were offered (30-1-528). This indeed
was the express purpose of the temple with its altar (snmn). for
when the temple was destroyed their chief complaint is that they
can no longer offer sacrifice. One would suppose that such
offerings would be the duty of the priests, the sons of Aaron, or
at any rate of Levites. But although priests1 are frequently
mentioned, they are nowhere called sons of Aaron, nor does the
name Aaron ever occur, nor that of Levi or the levitical order.
It seems difficult to explain away this omission and at the same
time to maintain that the 'house of Aaron ' and the levites were
recognized in the seventh century in Judaea as they were later.
The question is too large to be discussed here. I will only call
1 lOJrD. For the priests of the Egyptians they use N'tM.as in the OT and
elsewhere.
INTRODUCTION xxiii
attention to the fact that apart from the Hexateuch (de quo
videant critici !) the name Aaron occurs only in Psalms, Ezra,
Nehemiah, Chronicles, and once in Judges, twice (really once) in
Samuel, and once in Micah. The passage in Micah (64) is pro-
bably an addition, in i Sam. 1208 the name is certainly added
as the natural accompaniment of Moses,1 and in Judges (2028) it is
a gloss to complete the genealogy. That is to say, it does not
occur for certain in any undoubtedly early writer, not even in
Ezekiel ! There is an explanation of this, which I leave the
reader to discover. It certainly looks as if the house of Aaron
were a late post-exilic invention, and if so, the colonists would
naturally know nothing of it.
What precisely constituted a kaheu at Elephantine does not
appear. One of their prerogatives, we might suppose, would be
to possess the Law of Moses and to administer it. Yet there is
no hint of its existence. We should expect that in 3025 they
would say ' offer sacrifice according to our law ', and that in
other places they would make some allusion to it. But there is
none. So far as we learn from these texts Moses might never
have existed, there might have been no bondage in Egypt, no
exodus, no monarchy, no prophets. There is no mention of
other tribes and no claim to any heritage in the land of Judah.
Among the numerous names of colonists, Abraham, Jacob,
Joseph, Moses, Samuel, David, so common in later times, never
occur (nor in Nehemiah), nor any other name derived from their
past history as recorded in the Pentateuch and early literature.
It is almost incredible, but it is true.
Again, that essentially Jewish (though also Babylonian) institu-
tion, the Sabbath, is nowhere noticed. Even if there were no
occasion for mentioning it explicitly, we should expect that it
would sometimes interfere with the transaction of business when
that involved the drawing up of a document. At the present
day no practising orthodox Jew would write on the Sabbath.
Dr. Fotheringham, in a note on the subject \x\JTS 14 (1913),
p. 574, concludes from a calculation of the dates that ' they do not
1 The LXX in v. 8 has KarwKiatv, ' He (i.e. God) made to dwell', rightly, for
Moses and Aaron did not go into the land. For • brought forth ' Cod. A has the
singular (f('fyyaytv) as if of Moses alone.
xxiv INTRODUCTION
prove the existence of such a scruple, nor indeed the absence of
it, for no document between Jews seems to be certainly dated on
the Sabbath. There is in fact a complete silence on the subject.
Another of these negative instances concerns the festivals.
None of them is mentioned except, in one papyrus, the feast of
Unleavened Bread and possibly the Passover. Even in the
case of these it is difficult to explain the fact. No. 21 is an edict
of Darius ordering 1 an observance of the feast of Unleavened
Bread, and, if the proposed restoration is right, the Passover.
This can only mean either that the festivals in question were
unknown in the colony, or that they had fallen into desuetude.
It might even be taken as an argument that Josiah's great cele-
bration of the Passover ('Surely there was not kept such a
passover from the days of the Judges' 2 Ki. 2322) was the first
institution of it, and that the colonists, having left their country
before 621, knew no more of it than they knew of Deuteronomy.
That, however, is not proved and is hardly probable. It is more
likely that the Passover in early times was irregularly observed,
that Josiah really revived it after a period of neglect, and that its
yearly celebration was only established, like so much else, under
Ezra. This would equally well account for the edict (no. 21).
Though the colonists would have vaguely known of the institu-
tion, they would have been accustomed to neglect it, as their
fathers did before Josiah's time. The issue of the edict thus
again suggests that they may have already left Judaea before
621. The important thing however, about which there is no
doubt, is that the order came from the Persian king. It was
a curt command (if my restoration is approximately correct) :
' In the month of Tybi (?) let there be a Passover for the Jewish
garrison '. That is the whole of it— from the king to Arsames
the governor of the province. The details are added by the
messenger, who was clearly a Jew — 'your brother Hananiah '.
Various reasons may have induced the Great King to intervene
in the religious affairs of an obscure settlement, but whatever
they were, the case is exactly parallel to that of the letter of
1 Blau, in Magyar-zsido Szemle 1921, p. 44, argues that it was only permissive,
granting exemption from military duties during the festival.
INTRODUCTION xxv
Artaxerxes in Ezra 712"4", and shows that we need not doubt the
authenticity of the latter document. The .similarity of the style
of the letter in Ezra to that of texts in this collection is striking.
No doubt in both cases the king was only responsible for the
general order or permission. The details are due to his Jewish
proteges. See further in the introduction to no. ai. Apparently
they did keep the Passover on this occasion, as directed, for it is
mentioned at least on two ostraca ! (not included in this volume),
of about the same date as no. 21, though of course these may refer
to another celebration of it. It is worth noting also that the
great list (no. 22) of subscriptions to the temple funds was drawn
up in the same year (419) as the Passover edict, and it is difficult
to believe that they are not connected. This again would seem
to indicate that the Passover was an exceptional event. On the
other hand, in no. 21 there cannot have been any directions for
the ceremony, for there is no room on the papyrus, whereas the
rules for the feast of Unleavened Bread occupy half the docu-
ment. Did they know all about the one (choosing the lamb,
bitter herbs, eating in haste, &c.) and not about the other ? It
will be seen that the conclusions to be drawn from no. 21 are not
all certain. What is certain is that the celebration of the
(Passover and) feast of Unleavened Bread was ordered by the
Persian king, and that these are the only festivals 2 mentioned
(and that exceptionally) in these papyri.
If the arguments here adduced are at all well-founded, it
follows that the religious condition of Judaism before the exile,
so far as we can draw deductions about it from these papyri, was
very different from what has been usually assumed. To sum it
up, we may picture the historical development somewhat as
follows. From early times documents3 which eventually formed
part of the Tora, no doubt existed. They were partly historical,
partly legal and theological, and were composed at various dates.
But they were the possession of a priestly or learned class.
1 Ungnad no. 77 A 5 and PSBA 1915, p. 222, perhaps both by the same hand.
-' Jn Ungnad no. 77 A3 even if N^D = D13D, I cannot think that it refers to the
feast of Tabernacles. In Neh. 817 we are practically told that the feast had never
been kept before.
3 I think there is no doubt that they were written in cuneiform and probably in
the Babylonian language, though this is not necessary to the argument.
xxvi INTRODUCTION
necessarily limited in number. In the earliest times, down to,
say, the reign of Solomon, owing to the disunion of the inhabi-
tants, the unsettled state of the country and the difficulty of
communication, the possessors of these documents can have had
little influence on the mass of the people, who lived in isolated
groups, without knowledge of any Law, following the religious
customs and beliefs with which they happened to be in contact.
Later on we find the prophetic class becoming important and
using its influence to promote the exclusive worship of Ya'u
among the people, though still with little reference to a written
Law or to the early history. Then came the exile, and we
cannot know what ferment of mind and spirit took place in
Babylon or in Judaea. No sooner is the exile ended and order
to some extent restored in Jerusalem, than we find in Nehemiah
frequent insistence on the Law of Moses, in striking contrast
to the earlier literature, which ignores it. It had suddenly sprung
into full existence, and a definite effort was made to spread
among the people the knowledge of it, which had previously
belonged to the few, by reading1 it in public (Neh. 8813 &c).
Apparently such readings were made a regular institution, for
we find them mentioned again in Neh. g3, 131. What was it
they read ? I believe it was the Tora very much as we have
it to-day. The constant insistence, especially in the latter part
of Nehemiah, on details required by the Pentateuch, seems
certainly to point to this. Moreover, the existence of the
Samaritan recension of the Pentateuch, practically identical with
the Masoretic, can hardly be explained in any other way. If
the Samaritan schism occurred, as tradition states, somewhere
about 430 B.C. (Josephus makes it a century later), the hostile
community was not likely to adopt a body of Jewish law com-
piled after that date. We can only suppose that, at the time, the
Pentateuch was already in existence, and had gained such
general acceptance that the deserting priest Menasseh felt it
advisable to carry the Law with him. Who then was responsible
for this fruitful innovation ? I think the answer is given by the
1 The much-quoted passage, Neh. 88, is generally taken to mean that they trans-
lated it extempore into Aramaic — the beginning of Targum. There is no reason
why it should not mean that they read a Hebrew translation from cuneiform
Babylonian.
INTRODUCTION xxvii
persistent rabbinical tradition ' that the Law was lost and Ezra
restored it. Only it would be more correct to say that the Law
did not exist in its present form until Ezra drew it up, compiling
it from existing separate sources, and completing it. He is
described specially (Ezra 7e) as 'a ready scribe in the law of
Moses ', who ' had prepared his heart to seek the law of the
Lord . . . and to teach' it (710). Having been educated in
Babylonia he must have been familiar with the difficult cuneiform
writing, as well as with the Babylonian language, with Aramaic
and, no doubt, with Hebrew. He was therefore able, with the
help of his colleagues the priests' to put in order the [cuneiform]
tablets containing the various sources of the Pentateuch, to
translate them into Hebrew, to weld them together into a more or
less consistent whole, and to write down the result in the simple
Aramaic alphabet which he had learned in Assyria (JV7IB>K).
This would account alike for the general uniformity of language
and for the idiosyncrasies of various parts, which were due
partly to the diverse characteristics of the original documents,
and partly to differences in the style of the various collaborators.
In enforcing the Law, Ezra was helped by the powerful support
of the Persian king (726), without which it could never have
obtained general and immediate acceptance.2
It may be objected that the above account is merely imaginary.
It is true that many of the details of it are nowhere explicitly
recorded. Nor should we expect that even the central fact of
Ezra's redaction of the Law would be described. It was neces-
sary to his success that the newly promulgated code should
je represented as that which was originally revealed to Israel
by the hand of Moses — which, in its essence, it may have been.
The strength of Ezra's moral appeal (apart from the political
support of the Persian king) lay in his insistence that the Law
had hitherto been neglected, that this neglect was the cause
of the national misfortunes, and that the only hope for the future
was to be found in a return to the supposed faith of an ideal
past. To have admitted that the Law was a new thing, invented
even with the best objects, would have defeated his whole purpose.
1 e.g. in B. T. Sanhedrin, f. cil'and Sukka, f. aoa.
3 So too Ed. Meyer, Die Eittstehuiig cies Jn<kn/ions, 1896.
xxviii INTRODUCTION
And perhaps it was not new. Various documents, of different
date?, must or may have been in existence, from which the j
complete work was produced very much in the manner on i
which modern criticism insists — only that previously the docu-
ments had not been generally accessible, and that the final
redaction took place at one definite time, and not as a gradual
and rather undefined process. This view, though many diffi-
culties still remain, and though its details may require modifica-
tion, does on the whole provide an intelligible explanation of
the facts.
I have digressed at some length upon it, because the problems
which it seeks to explain are the most important arising from
a study of these papyri. Regarded without prejudice, these
texts lead to the conclusion that the Pentateuch, both in its
historical and legal aspects, was unknown in the fifth century
to the Jews of Elephantine, and it is probable that the populace
in Judaea in the seventh century was no better informed. But
in the book of Nehemiah we find the Pentateuch being made
known and accepted — and we are bound to seek an explanation.
The importance of the new revelation is that in it we see the
birth of modern Judaism, which could never have developed
by natural process from pre-exilic Judaism. The subsequent
development of it down to the present day is easily traced, in
the gradual elaboration of halakha and the exaltation of it by
the suppression of all else — its systematization in the Mishna —
its discussion in the Talmud — its codification again by Maimo-
nides — its extension by Jacob b. Asher and Joseph Karo — with
its final reduction ad impossibilc in the pilpul of the eighteenth
century — the moderation of it by Moses Mendelssohn — and the
revolt against it by the modern ' reformed ' Jews. All this is
the natural growth of the system born under Ezra : it could not
have grown out of a religious system such as that of the colonists
of Elephantine.
Now to return to our texts. The internal affairs of the
colony, as mentioned above, were directed by the head man
of the community, who was Yedoniah in 419. No reports of
his court are preserved and no mention is made of his adminis-
tering the Mosaic law. Even when both parties were Jews
INTRODUCTION . xxix
they appeared before the Persian-Egyptian court (i3, 2v52) though
the composition of the court is usually not stated. Perhaps the
head of the degel exercised magisterial functions, and this would
account for the mention of the degel of the parties at issue ;
see on no. 2512. As a military body they were under the NpTon
'the commander of the garrison", who was in turn subordinate to
the Tims, a Persian title. That the latter was superior to the
former appears from 204 "', where Waidrang is N7Ti3~i, compared
with 30"', where he has become (twelve years later) fratarak, and
his son (307) is N^roi . The fratarak was no doubt governor of
the province (of Tstrs). The governor-general of the country
is usually called simply fNIO ' our lord ', without any more
specific title. In the latter part of the period he was named
DBHN, O P Arsama, Bab. ArSam (Ungnad), Arsames. He was
directly responsible to the king.
Several minor officials are mentioned, as N^n (i64-5), swift "IDD
(1716), Nnnrs (1757), snmon (264-23), snajana (264Si, wa&a ton^n
(27°), on whom see the notes on the passages.
The courts over which the K^nTTjmd the Tirna .presided, with
their assessors , (s^^^^jidjmnktered^jj^dojjblJjie. law., of the
Persian empire, but this law, like so much else, was evidently
taken over by the conquerors from the Babylonians, or was based
on their system. Thus we find the enumeration of relatives of
the parties, the fine for breach of contract (ejM \r\)\ kaspi iddin),
the definition of the boundaries of property : special phrases
like 3311 p (dtnu dabdbu), 33^ 2Q, K3^0 ^3X3, with their variants :
particular words, like na (Bab. garu) 'to bring an action' and
many more. See e.g. Meissner, Beitr. znm altbab. Priva tree/it
(1893). The method of preparing a document may be compared
with that described by Jeremiah (329+) drawn up in 586. The
money was weighed on the scales (pap. 1524), the deed was
written, signed by (or for) the witnesses, and sealed. One deed
(no. 5) was actually found rolled up, tied with string and with the
clay seal still intact. But Jeremiah's document was evidently on
a clay tablet, placed in an envelope, and an ' open ' duplicate was
also made. The same practice may have been followed at
Elephantine, and this would account for the duplicate of no. 2.
The deed was then delivered to the interested party (2TO *! "1SD
^VDPN^ ^l^S) in the presence of the witnesses, and was stored in
xxx INTRODUCTION
a clay pot (Jer. 3a1*) or in a box (as some oi the papyri were
found) 'that it might last many days'.
In general the connexion with Babylonian law is well worthy
of a thorough study, as is also the question of the double dating
of documents and the chronology generally. This has not been
attempted here, partly because of the necessity of restricting the
limits of this volume, and partly because it would require special
knowledge which I do not claim to possess.
Finally a word must be added as to the money. The most
important text in this connexion is no. 15, a marriage contract in
which the value of various items of the gift to the bride is
stated and the total given at the end. The items are valued
as follows :
In line
5.
5
shek
dIs
6,
I
karash,
2
V
8,
2
>»
<s
.,
io.
<s
..
11,
7
>•
12,
1
>)
2 R
12,
1
>'
2 R
13-
2
•»
13-
2 R
Total. 3 kerashin 34 shekels 6 R
In line 14 the total is given as 6 kerashin, 5 shekels, 2ohallurin.
Now the standard (see below) of the silver is given sometimes as
KmtJ>yi> II n and sometimes as I Wlb II n (cf. e.g. 15714 with 2015).
Hence it seems probable that 1 karash = NmK>y 'the ten-piece'
or presumably the piece of 10 shekels. If so, then 30 shekels =
3 kerashin. Applying this to our first total we have 3 kerashin
34 shekels 6R = 6 kerashin 4 shekels 6 R, which should be equal
to 6 kerashin 5 shekels 20 hallurin. The next question is, what
is the value of R ? It might of course also be a D, and it has
been taken to stand for p»3"n drachma, but this would hardly be
found in the earlier texts. Taken as R, it might stand for 'jn,
which seems to be a money term in 736, &c, of unknown value.
The simplest explanation, however, is to take it for (N)ym
' a quarter ' sc. of a shekel. (A corroboration of this may be
INTRODUCTION xxxi
found in ij-4. If the wife divorces her husband, she is to pay-
back 7 shekels 2 R, i. e. 7| shekels, which are equal to the price
he originally paid for her (155) plus 50 per cent.) Then in the
above equation (4 sh. 6 R = 5 sh. 20 hal.) since 4 R= 1 shekel, it
follows that 2 R=20 hallurin, and we have the following table:
1 karash =10 shekels.
1 shekel = 4 quarters
1 quarter = 10 hallurin.
As to the names, karash is Persian, no doubt the same as
karla on a trilingual weight in the British Museum. In the
Babylonian inscription the 2 karsa are given as \ of a mina, see
Weissbach, Keilinschriftcii der Achameniden (191 1), p. 105, so
that 6 keraSin = 60 shekels = 1 mina. (The reading B>33 in Sayce
and Cowley is wrong, and the conclusions drawn from it need not
be considered.)
No satisfactory derivation of the name karsa has been proposed.
Shekel and rebhd {ribJia) are both common Semitic.
Halliiru is a small Babylonian money term (see the Lexicon),
not previously found in Western Semitic. Qi.PSBA 25 (1903).
p. 206.
The larger amounts are generally reckoned by royal weight
(n:6o »J3N3, cf. 2 Sam. I42G), as also in Assyria (Koberle, NKZ
1908, p. 178), and are further defined as wrwfa II 1 or I W-oh II 1.
If the above calculations are correct, this would imply an alloy
of 2 quarters, or § a shekel, in 10, that is 5 per cent. Money is
also sometimes described as sp'TC epa (57, a811,12), where it is
likewise paid K37D "03K3. This must mean pure silver as distin-
guished from silver with 5 per cent, alloy, and ' royal weight '
must refer to weight only and not to standard. Specimens of
certified weights with Aramaic inscriptions1 are known, e.g. CIS
ii, 1, no. 108 (from Abydos) and no. 1 (from Nineveh). The
higher sums (or weights) p» ' minae ' and p333 ' talents ' are
rarely found. The business transactions are as a rule not on that
scale. Also gold was apparently not used as currency.
In the later documents (35* 7, 3712) we find another term used,
1 Where the 2 cannot mean 'double', but is to be taken as in NO^JO ^2X3, so
that Np"lX *T3 is ' according to (the weierht) of the country ' and *p£ "[T3] ' accord-
ing to the weight" of the king'.
xxxii INTRODUCTION
nnno, which is no doubt the Greek o-raTrjp, and is given as the
equivalent of two shekels (.35*).
On the literary pieces reference may be made to the special
introductions to the Ahikar fragments and the version of the
Behistun inscription.
For the grammar, see the introduction to the edition of Sayce
and Cowley, supplemented by the Anhang iibcr den aramdi-
schen Dialekt in Sachau (p. 261). I hope to publish a detailed
treatment of the grammar in comparison with biblical Aramaic
at a future date.
My main object in this volume has been to contribute some-
thing to the establishment of the text and translation, as the
only sure basis for future investigation, rather than to attempt
a discussion of all the questions involved.
To avoid complication, letters which are broken in the text
but are nevertheless certain are not marked. Doubtful letters
are overlined. Letters restored are enclosed between square
brackets. The readings have been tested over and over again
with the facsimiles. In the translation, restorations are indicated
as far as possible by italics. Such restorations were necessary in
order to show the connexion of the sentences. They have been
made with great care and after much thought, and are in many
cases certain. Others of course represent only my personal view
and are open to question. I have tried in the notes to distinguish
between what is certain and what is conjectural.
Where the restored letters or words are not my own. I have
tried in the notes to ascribe them to their originators, but I fear
that I have not always succeeded in doing so. The literature deal-
ing with these papyri is large and scattered, so that some proposals
may have escaped me, or been adopted unconsciously, while
some readings have been suggested by more than one scholar.
Words inserted for clearness, owing to the difference of idiom
between the two languages, arc put in parentheses.
Proper names found in the O.T. have been spelt as in the R.Y..
though this causes some inconsistencies.
Where the vocalization of a name is unknown, its consonants
only are printed, in capitals.
Unknown words, introduced to show the form of the sentence,
are transliterated (consonants only) in small capitals.
^-ra^-Lx,aul^ i^o^a-t^-rti
ARAMAIC PAPYRI
{ No. i.
Agreement dated 495 b.c.
The numeral after roa> in line 1 is a very carelessly written "3 ( = 20).
It cannot be -> (=10). The year is therefore the 27th of Darius, and
since Darius II reigned only twenty years, the king must be Darius I
and the date 495 b.c. The papyrus is thus the earliest in the collection.
This conclusion is supported by the style of the writing, with which cf.
that of no. 2 (484 b.c). Sachau also compares no. 3, which is less like.
Note also the spelling WT1, as in O. T., which seems to be earlier than
BWH and cnnim as in the later papyri, under Darius II. This is the
only place in these papyri where it has this form. A characteristic of-
the early writing seems to be the pronounced difference between thick
and thin strokes. The formulae also differ from those of later documents.
This is a contract or agreement arising out of a previous decision
of the court, of which no. 67, 3 is perhaps a fragment. Certain property
had been divided between two parties (cf. no. 28) who now agree to an
exchange of half of their respective shares. The names of the parties
are all feminine, Selua and Yethoma of the one part and Ya'a'or of the
other part, showing that in 495 b. c. in this colony women could hold
property in their own right, and could go to law about it.
Sachau, plate 30. Ungnad, no. 31.
ma risi^D moN N3$>» cmmb 1 1ll III "3 iw p|S« ni[']b II d[i],,3 i
ibs> "ob \2r\^ [ton db&b> ma nwnrri nnn« noi'm rwp 2
n Nnso :6s r\hn N^rm ijm tota »i*i {? w. »? N[h]jo 3
■or xn3Dn *anai ^ xb pns dv in»l> rantu oy •on bo 4
3ip mai 13 nroo ns ^^ k^> ^ warp jrox n^ [-i]p3[i] 5
^ \nv ^ pn» n *3t ntum ww ni ♦arn? ^THi 6
31FI »?^| KH3D1 II III IBH3 «1D3 7
Wins? 8
n»TTin na iwn[n] 9.
[rvjiw "13 d»6p 10
»30 13 rTOW n
2599 B
2 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. i
1On the 2nd day of the month Epiphi of the 27th year of King
Darius, said Selua daughter of a Kenaya and Yethoma her sister to
Ya'a'or daughter of Shelomim, We have given to you half 3 the share
which was granted to us by the king's judges and Ravaka the com-
mander, in exchange for half the share which 4 accrued to you with
Ne'ehebeth. Hereafter, on a future day, we shall not be able to sue
you in the matter of this your share, 5 and say, We did not give it to you ;
nor shall a brother or sister (of ours), son or daughter, relative c or alien
be able to sue you ; and whoever shall sue you in the matter of this
your share which we have given you, shall pay to you 7 the sum of
5 karash and the share is yours : and 8 the witnesses (are) 9 Hosea
b. Hodaviah, 10 Shelomim b. Azariah, u Zephaniah b. Machi.
Line 1. Usually the equivalent day of the Jewish month is also given.
Its omission here and in no. 2 may be merely accidental. In no. 5
(471 b.c.) it is added, but in no. 7 (461 e.c) it is omitted. i"lK1?D
(elsewhere N1^D, m^D) as a fern, name, is only known from these papyri.
Masc. who, b>0 in O.T.
Line 2. n^p, only here. It may be n^p (so Sachau), cf. njp?N, or for
rY01p as in 42. HDllV only here and in 67, 3 (with ntota). The
masc. Din*1 and HDTV also occur. Tixnrv only here. No doubt to be
■!•>£«*>*■) divided iW = VP and "TiK Might' (so G. B.Gray). On rW = W» see
1314 note. Before fn3M it would be usual to have into.
Line 3. N[n]3D something allotted. In Hebrew cf. Pss. n6, 165. In
Talmud it is a common legal term for 'share' (= pbn in 28s) assigned
by the court. There is nothing to show, the nature of the property.
Nata "n. The previous action was taken before the royal (i. e. Persian)
court, not the beth din of the colony. "|TO. In this alphabet there is
no certain distinction between 1 and 1, except that 1 seems generally to
have a shorter down-stroke. The first 1 is unusual in form, but probable.
The word can only be a preposition 'by order of &c. or a proper
name with ' and '. The latter is more probable, but the name is unknown.
Justi gives Rawai. Cf. perhaps Zend ram, 'pleasant' with the OP
termination -la. This is another argument for the early date, since in
408-7 (the alternative date) the N^nm was p&J (307). K^nm one
word, as usually. He sat with the (civil?) court. Cf. also 167.
Line 4. WTWO, elsewhere nana. It seems to be a Hebrew Niphal form,
' beloved '. The meaning of Dy is not clear. It may mean that N
was co-partner with Ya'a'or, when it would be equivalent to ' and ' (so
Sachau), or N was a slave and part of the property divided (cf. no. 28).
The former is the more probable, but her father ought to be named,
nno^. There is a' trace of b and a down-stroke after it. Sachau
disregards both, and reads in) 'and one other day'. So Torczyner,
'one day hereafter'. We should expect IS' before OV as elsewhere.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. i
It must mean 'hereafter, on some later day', a variant of the usual
* to-morrow or another day '. For b cf. Ahikar, 1. 39. 733 usually
taken as 723 with first radical assimilated, from ?y. More probably
from a stem 712 (72), of which 7H3 is only another spelling. "3133
ought to be (Sachau says a mistake for) »33*TJ3. Note the construction,
which is usual. The root mj, cf. Hebrew (Piel) and Aramaic, means to
' stir up ', hence to institute legal proceedings against, with an accusative
of the person. It is a Babylonian legal term. or 'this of thine',
speaking to a woman, as *jr to a man.
Line 5. [l]B3[l], so Epstein. Sachau's n»i (for >V\) gives no satisfactory
sense. 1E3 for 1EN3 is not wholly convincing, since the form does not
occur elsewhere (but cf. "OD? in 322). A 3 alone does not quite fit the
space, for the lines begin very evenly, but there is a trace of the tail
of a 3. Therefore not 1CN3. We should expect "With, but that cannot
be read. PD3PP. The n is a suffix, ' we have given it '. 3*1p
defectively for 3np ' related or not related ' (pTPl), the regular formula,
and similarly in Babylonian law.
Line 7. JEH3. The karash was worth 10 shekelsjsee p. xxii). This
is not an unusually high penalty, as Sachau suggests. As a rule the
money is defined as being N37D *33N3. 3171. The reading is clear, but
it looks as though added as an afterthought. Elsewhere we have JH K71
221 N71. In later Aramaic 3inor in means ' again ^Jjurther '. I doubt
if it can mean here ' nevertheless '. More likely it introduces KHHty,
1 moreover the witnesses are '.
Lines 9-1 1. The witnesses' names here, as in no. 11, were written by
the scribe. rrmn 12 JJt^in occurs almost certainly in no. 2. irnin
is fairly certain, not iTn*V (as Sachau), an unknown name. The pro-
nunciation Hodaviah is attested by the Masoretes.
Line 10. DE17r«y possibly the same as in 1. 2, witnessing on behalf
of his daughter. [rv]~lfj/ uncertain, but probable. Hardly the same
as in 206 (420 B.C.), but perhaps his grandfather. There is some evidence
of the practice of calling a child after his grandfather.
Line 11. "OB only here (and in Num. 1315).
No. 2.
Contract for supplying Com to the Garrison 484 B.C.
There is a slight uncertainty as to the number of the year, owing to
a break in the papyrus. It must be either 2 (as Sachau) or 3. There is
hardly room for II"', since in this papyrus the ~> is made rather large,
cf. 1. 4 and 1. 6. Year 22 is impossible, because Xerxes reigned only
20 or 21 years. On the whole 2 is the more probable, and the date is
b 2
4 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 2
therefore 484 b.c The style of the writing in general resembles that of
no. 1.
This is a contract, of which the precise terms are obscure owing to the
loss of the ends of all the lines (about 18 letters missing in each line).
The main points are that Hosea and Ahiab received from Espemet
a consignment of barley and lentils which they undertake to deliver
(at Syene) to the government officials for the use of a section of the garrison.
The similar document, no. 3, may be a duplicate, but it differs in form
and thus throws little light on the details of the transaction. Epstein has
endeavoured to combine the two, and on the assumption of their identity
has restored the ends of most of the lines, but he is not convincing. It
seems best not to attempt the restoration of most of the lines.
Sachau, plates 25, 26. Ungnad, no. 27.
$?B>in 10K N]TV3 3*3 N]a[b»] BHWl \l n3B> *DN3 m*b II III III "=5 3 i
r.-l'-. snbra ivjwobs in ooBlDNij Pinna -13 atrntu rnnwi "13 2
p"]ycj> n* by n^n. "^?. K"?l- *$Q t,T 3
I III ■?-?] |3Tw |[ny]pb \-> 3tin jnsbpi II III NT 4
/]//// ">3"? pins' 3ny» pabrai pye' ba 5
bnob pin* II III b]a v Dpnbxrva n nnxo n ;[naj] rr -ȣ> 6
v pa}5 wall pnx pjw I -i3jb naab 1 1 paa 7
II III] pnx pyt^b II paj i^'iaj dnd [n 8
p* by nan* nax n rat] tony ba3 nanax 1:3 psb 3*9*. 9
*T lhnaa n nns*J5 *n Dpnbxnn *t nnxo ** nar «b[*nb 10
yrri KnKb 3-1 mp i]h jnaa nanax hjt X-12D3 p*na n
nan^ nax n tniay ian]a* K*re*.K nso Dipi xabra n*3 12
*? sniay ba jnaa sb jm sbyan] p"na *t nbx txraib baiob jvby 13
xnvijs* nBD Dipt sabn n*33 proa i? 14
^- v^^ *pl]8 SjD3 +»l f^-13 Sp3 "]b 3in3 rftmN 15
*3:/5' "f bai pab *r *V] sabra rva *i jons3 obey roxi N*nbs* 16
)H xbi xbyara 3*na *r] sniaya ^bonn ny nriK»b taba* nax |b 17
3N*nN as by y^in 3m 18
J3]3 13 myae>a wpsdm "13 aoa nw 19
]ia mynx 11a na mc in*3N na ban 20
fcH33 12 VOP fnJiT -13 miDN 21
Endorsement. BO]SDnb [3K*n]K*. JWh'n 3313 [*r KIBD 22
1 On the 28th of the month Paophi in the 2nd year of King Xerxes in
the city of Feb, said Hosea 2 b. Hodaviah and Ahiab b. Gemariah to
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 2 5
"Espemet b. Peft'onith the sailor . . . 3 of Hanani, the carpenter, saying,
You have delivered to us barley 4 8 (?) and beans, 1 1 ardabs
to 44 (?) ardabs of barley 6 total barley and beans together
55 ardabs c . . . 1 1 men of the company of Betheltakem every
5 ardabs for the ration ofn2 men, to each man 2 ardabs of bailey and
2 G . . . also 11 men 8 of ihe company of Nabushalliv, 2 men to J ardabs
of barley ; we have accepted it n and our heart is content therewith. We
will convey this corn which you have delivered to us 10 to these /roops of the
company of Betheltakem and of the company of Nabushalliv as n written
in this document. We will render an account before the company commander
and the authorities of 12 Government House and before the clerks of the
treasury (and) they shall give out the corn which you have delivered 13 to us
to be conveyed to those men who are described above ; and if we do not
deliver all the cor?i that is u yours in full at Government House and before
the clerks of the treasury, as aforesaid, 15 we shall be liable to you in the
sum of 100 karash, pure (?) silver as we swear by Ya'u 16 the God, and you
have a right to our payment from Government House and ihe counting-
house ; and all that is 17 ours you have a right to seize until you are
indemnified in full for the corn as aforesaid, and no suit shall lie.
18 Written by Hosea at the dictation of Ahiab. 19 Witnesses: Ki' b.
Iskishu ; Nushku-idri b. N . . . 20 Dukal b. Abijah ; Shuri b. Kadu ;
Ata-idri b. . . . 21 Asvadata b. Jonathan ; Shabbethai b. Nabda.
22 (Endorsement.) Deed which Hosea and Ahiab wrote for ~Espemet.
Line 1. Date, see on i1. SJ>Wn, in no. 5 (thirteen years later)
BHNW, OP Khshayarsha. The place, y or pD, was probably
mentioned in the lost part of the line. y^in must be the name of the
first party. Cf. 1. 18 and 1. 22, and 32. He is perhaps the same as in i9.
Line 2. [DES]DN^>, in 33 . , SDN^. In 4* (a similar document)_t3GBpX
is mentioned, and in 610 J"IE>QDK is son of JT01J7D32 (see 513).
Line 3. As Epstein points out, there is not room for 13 (as Sachau) at
the beginning. He suggests ''f, which requires some word like ' servant '
at the end of J. 2. Also nniT1 (sing.) shows that only one person is
addressed. N"iJJ, cf. 26° NnJJ, ' ship's carpenters '. Espemet in 610 is
a sailor. However the ~i has a short tail and should be a *T. [py]ty cf. 34.
Line 4. It does not seem possible to read anything but III at the
beginning. Can the numeral be divided between the two lines? I do
not remember any other case. The connexion is obscure.
Line 5. 3"iyE, though singular, must mean ' taken together'. The barley
and beans being regarded as a quantity, not as plural. I] I IIIT3-3
The first figure is badly made or defaced, but "3 is the only possibility.
I (as Sachau) is out of the question. The numeral might be 54 to 59,
but see on 1. 7.
Line 6. ~>w is very uncertain. If right, is it the price per ardab
(10 shekels)? Vj is very uncertain. The first letter may be N.
i[inj] only the tail of a letter remains. nnND ' centuria ' (with suffix).
6 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 2
Probably a subdivision of tbe 7J1. Dpn?xrV3, as in 1. 10, the name of
the centurion. The numeral refers to the preceding p2:. The trace
of the next letter suggests a 3, which again suggests the words restored.
Line 7. 133? *13:I7, cf. 221. 3 is a subdivision of the ardab, probably
a quarter. The trace at the end may belong to a J. We want pi
somewhere here, but it is difficult to see how to complete the line.
If the number of men is the same as in the other company, with the
same allowance, they would account for the 55 ardabs in 1. 5. Then,
since there are, in all, 11 ardabs of beans in 1. 4 for 22 men, the half
ardab (II i) would be the allowance of beans per man.
Line 8. [n] hardly room for anything else. 178*133, cf. CIS. ii. 25
D7CD3, D = 1 in Babylonian. The construction here (2 men to [5]
ardabs) differs from that in 1. 7 (2^ ardabs to 1 man). At the end
something must be supplied like ' we have received the goods '.
Line 9. 132 as frequently, without a suffix, in these papyri. Bab. ina
libbi. At the end Epstein restores [{ID T\Vi\ KTQJJ from 3°, but whatever
the construction may be there, pD can hardly mean ' to Syene ' here.
Line 10. At the end there is a trace of O. As only two companies
have been mentioned the restoration is fairly certain.
Line n, end. Epstein proposes [p]H. There is no other word
beginning with 'H. He completes the line from 311. My translation of
JH jnj by ' render an account ' (or ' give instructions ' ?) is only a guess.
Line 12. N3?K> n\3 must be 'Government House', since the king did
not live at Elephantine or Syene. !3ri3\ asyndeton, as in 1. n, or final,
1 that they should give '. The restoration (from 312) is Epstein's. It must
be nearly right, though rather confused.
Line 13. 72)a? 'give it (to some one) to convey', i.e. send it. At the
end something of the kind is required to introduce the penalty in I. 15.
Line 14. p:D2 'according to number', i.e. exactly, in full. It cannot
be ' in minae ' (as Sachau alternatively) which would be pD3 and
meaningless. At the end Epstein proposes np?n N? T (cf. 315), but
his meaning is not clear.
Line 15. 3in3 is unusual, but quite certain. +» the sign for 100 has
an unusual (perhaps early) form. The penalty is very heavy. If
10 shekels per ardab (1. 6) was really the cost of the goods, this is nearly
double the total value. The end should define the standard of the
money. Epstein restores NV17K [nna *J3K3 ~>b VB>] »I «JD3, cf. 1 12 and the
demotic deed of 493/2 b.c. cited by Staerk {Die Jiid. Ara?n. Papyri . . .
p. 26). But »l is not used in this formula, nor is NH7N added to Ptah
in no. 11. For PpS f]D3 cf. 57, 2811, but there is not sufficient ground
for restoration.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 2 7
Line 16. NH7N the connexion is obscure. Sachau thinks it may belong
to an oath : ' we swear by the god X '. |D""I33 ' our share ' or ' pay-
ment'. Possibly a percentage on the deal — or as in no.' 11, their military
pay. The construction with 1 is awkward. The restoration is
Epstein's, from 318, where see note.
Line 17. N?Enn, i.e. you receive in full the value of the corn. The
end is restored from 320.
Line 18. 03 pj? 'at the dictation or direction of is a common
expression, cf. n16, but it is unusual to find a man writing for his partner.
JflPin no doubt the partner whose name is lost in line 1. He acts as
scribe. If he were a new person he would be further described here.
So also in 1. 22.
Line 1 9. The witnesses' names are not written by the scribe, and are
very difficult to read. N^D or tfa, cf. JOD in 1 41. Egyptian ? as his
father's name.
Line 20. 73H is more probable than 7311. Otherwise the reading
is certain. Neither name is known. "Hity Sachau cites CIS. ii. 1, 1542.
113 (or 113) probable. Unknown.
Line 21. miDX (or m~). Sachau miCN. Cf. Persian Aspadata?
[JUT a mistake ? for fn:i.T. NH3J or N~I33.
Line 22 is incomplete at both ends. It is the endorsement written on
the outside after the document had been rolled up, tied, and sealed.
This is the usual formula, sometimes with a word added to indicate the
nature of the transaction (pniD "ISO &c). Being outside, the endorse-
ments are generally much defaced.
No. 3.
A Duplicate (?) of No. 2.
Beginnings of lines of a document very similar to no. 2, but perhaps
relating to a different transaction. Much of what is missing could
evidently be restored from no. 2, though the details remain obscure in
both. As so much is lost, it seemed best not to attempt restoration.
Sachau, plate 27. Ungnad, no. 29.
n-v]? II III III ^5 3 1
asoJriKi mn[in n]a 2
dd]sdx7 [p>2 pon]no 3
] pye> |T 7y 4
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 3
] 1 pmc \nzbu 5
f]nabm H/w] i>a 6
].Tllll[i ] rn£ 7
] fans jns^D 8
] jid rw [«n]uy 9
],»1 i"U[T N]nSD3 10
] »»T1 XJ-IND 1 1
] rona.i K-nay 12
K3]^0 ns[aa] P303 13
;]t ^>y nan* n 14
]£~t s£ n 15
Kl]5MS 16
] . . . P]D3 Mllta 1 7
]l p3^5 *T »31 18
nn«]o^ d[£>b> nasi] ^ 19
]i s^y:n ana n 20
]« »B33 [yn]n ana 21
na] na nit? vmrw 22
. . ,]:a5 na *["frijpw 23
]ib>»dS [na n]n:a 24
1 On the 28th of 2 b. Hodaviah and Ahi'ab 3 property-
holders tn Feb to TLspemet 4 to us barley 5 lentils, 20
ardabs c total barley and lentils " to 5 (?) men
8 lentils, 1 (?) ardab 9 this corn Syene 10 in this deed and
shall n the company, and the officers 12 the corn which
you gave 13 in full at G^'ernment Hous^ u which you
delivered to us 15 which does not belong to us 16 treasury
17 the god, silver 18 and the counting-house and
19 mine and you have a right to seize 20 as aforesaid, and
21 Written by Hosea at the hands (?) of khiab. 22 Witnesses : Shuri
b. Kadu 23 Nushku-idri b. Nabm'/w 2i Bagada/a b.
ISMSHD . . .
Line 1. The day of the month is the same as in no. 2. Perhaps the
two documents were drawn up on the same day.
Line 2. The form differs from that of no. 2. This line probably
contained a description of the parties, e. g. ' both Jews of the regiment
of X ', which is continued in 1. 3.
Line 5. Ardabs 20 4-, a quantity not mentioned in the extant part of
no 2
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 3 9
Line 7. The numeral can hardly be II II (as Sachau), since that would
be I III. It must be 5 or 6 or 8 (cf. 24) or 9. If it is 5 the ration
is the same as in no. 2.
Line 8. The I is very uncertain. Perhaps \~? as in 24?
Line 9. J1D seems certain, but construction ?
Line 15. nb is doubtful. After it Sachau reads pbn, but only b is
certain.
Line 17. After P|D2 the definition of standard is quite uncertain (sjHS?).
The fact that this follows NH7N no doubt supports Epstein's restoration
nna vnxa in 215.
Line 18, as in io9. The reading in both places is clear. *3 as
absolute form of 1V3 is found several times. We should not expect "'T "G,
cf. N37E JV3 in 1. 13. Sachau takes ]ilb as 'tiles', but there is not
much point in that as a description. From its association with the
treasury it must be some sort of bank or counting-house. In Ezra 61
there is a N'nSD JV3, a record office to which the treasury was attached, and
this must be something of the same sort. There is no word in O.T.
specially denoting a cuneiform clay tablet (ni? has various meanings).
In Ezek. 41 H33? may be such a tablet, on which a plan of the city was
drawn. Probably here p? means a tablet, and the ' house of tablets '
was the place where records of payments were stored — even though they
may have come to be written on papyrus. This would suit io9 also.
Line 19. *b by an oversight for p.
Line 21. ''Baa instead of DB by as in 218. Sachau 'by the hands of,
i.e. Ahiab wrote it. It is not in the same hand as no. 2, written by
Hosea. Seidel thinks it is for '•aa = DB3, the a having become otiose,
and a being added. But *B is never found (as a Hebraism) for DB
in these texts.
Lines 22, 23. These two witnesses also appear in no. 2. . . 333.
Ungnad suggests Bab. Nabnitu.
Line 24. [n]*JJ3 (probably) = Persian Bagadata. His father's name
(Egyptian ?) is unknown.
No. 4.
A small Fragment, apparently connected with
Nos. 2 and 3.
Written on both sides. Fragment probably of a letter. It is not
dated, but seems to relate to the transactions recorded in nos. 2 and 3.
Beginnings and ends of lines lost.
io ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 4
Sachau, plate 36. Ungnad, no. 42.
Obverse. ]3 *b nay [ 1
]b «|N1 pB>[ 2
] bjk Qgpn [ 3
«a rvaS n [ 4
Reverse. ] pJW |rOB>[n 5
] mya n:n [ 6
Jn DDDDN [ 7
] . u n jo pb[ 8
1 they made for me 2 s, and also for
3 he prepared, also 4 what you wish with it
5 we have found barley 6 here. Now
7 Espemet 8 since we
Line 2. Sachau suggests p^[*ia], but this would surely require a
numeral after it.
Line 3. \2Wpn Haphel, ' make ready ' (Sachau). Only here.
Line 4. n is almost certain. Not N, as Sachau. 133, cf. on 29.
Line 5. |nat?[n] 'we have found', not jras as Sachau. pyB> as in
nos. 2 and 3.
Line 7. DCQDX, cf. 22, 3s.
Line 8. ft-. Ungnad |*B" which Seidel restores to pD[3n], but the ?
is almost certain.
No. 5.
Grant of Building Rights. 471 B.C.
The date is quite certain, 471 b.c When found it was still rolled up,
tied and sealed.
This is an agreement between Koniya and Mahseiah, allowing the
former to build some kind of structure (i:tt or 13S, see note) between his
house and Mahseiah 's, which are adjacent.
It is the first of a series of documents in which Mahseiah and his
family are concerned. It is perfectly preserved.
Sayce and Cowley, pap. A.
snxnrn \l III -> rw D3na$> II /// /// 3 w W bh*b " m M~** \
jid n ws rw -ia rvormb mm brh po n *d-ik P*w ">a irap 2
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 5 11
nspb i^n tfrv3 jnn *b nam yby rvnN puk "idn^ nrii brb 3
n^j6 n nn'vb £*? wv3i> np3i n m -j^t -jr k-un nsn I "ijn 4
nyi rr6yi> <r W3 n-iT j» N^y nyi kjtjn |q W3 "ioe£ p3*in -jr k-un 5
rinsr rvn
■j£*i it n-ux ^y nod? "Un^n bnatj t& pn« Q,|> *■* ino 6
'f s If N'"13S1 Pp¥ PJD3 fcota "J2N2 II /// [BH3 *)D3 1^ JrUX "]n^3 [fl 7
nnNi nx mai 12 b^y ab priN Dr in ino n^ip rvp jm D£x 8
"ibv rwob rb ^ib in nonoj xb* mpi ^n ^y3 p»rm anp 9
x-i:xi x^y p yra n N2D3 rb \tw Druo nS>3* n n^T ir ntjn 10
^•un ab mip n:xi x^>y "ty m^>y rmob b^b* nJNi Q2X i^t ii
*? xpvj'3 ps:n xh in ^r x^> "jr xynn ncNi> nonob "hd'n'm
N^y p 3T»3 n N&D3 ^ frux *]n^3 |n xn^D rwiytaas rvn pm |»ra 13
I»a*3 v xpm pwbi>i ir xjnn rinsed d^p ruxi 14
«3 txnm mip dsd rut nisd vnx 13 rVB^s 3ns 15
^inx "13 inanp nnp . nw 13 nDra the? 16
psmx -13 n|n*ia the* yirin -13 rryety "ins? 17
wn -13 *taaa . rnraa "13 ni:n tip 18
nwsnn 13 thw im jnern -13 cnnj3 int? 19
Endorsement. non©^ iTJIp 3J13 '•T f!33 n N-UX nsD 20
1 On the i8ih of Elul, that is the 28th day of Pahons, year 15 of King
Xerxes, said - Koniya b. Zadok, an Aramaean of Syene, of the detachment
of Warizath, to Mahseiah b. Yedoniah, an Aramaean of Syene, 3 of the
detachment of Warizath, saying : I came to you and you have given to me
the gateway of your house to build 4 1 portico (?) there. This portico is
yours. It adjoins my house at its upper corner. 5 This portico shall
adjoin the side of my house from the ground upwards, from the corner
of my house at the upper end to the house of Zechariah. 6 To-morrow
or on any later day I have no power to restrain you from building above
(or upon) this portico of yours. 7 If I restrain you, I will pay you the
sum of 5 karash, royal weight, pure silver, and the portico is yours
8 assuredly. If Koniya dies to-morrow or on a later day no son or
daughter, brother or sister, 9 relative or stranger, soldier or citizen, shall
have power to restrain Mahseh or his son from building above 10 this
portico of his. Whoever restrains one of them shall pay him the sum
aforesaid, and the portico n is yours assuredly, and you have the right to
build above it upwards, and I Koniya have no power 12 to speak to
Mahseh saying : This gateway is not yours, and you shall not go out
(by it) into the street which 13 is between us and the house of Peft'onith,
the boatman. If I restrain you, I will pay you the sum aforesaid. u And
you have the right to open this gate and go out into the street which
12 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 5
is between us. 1,rj Pelatiah b. Ahio wrote this document at the dictation
of Koniya. Witnesses thereto: la Witness Mahseh b. Isaiah. Witness
Satibarzanes b. Atharli. 17 Witness Shemaiah b. Hosea. Witness
Phrataphernes b. Artaphernes. 18 Witness Bagadata b. Nabukudurri.
Nabuli b. Darga. 19 Witness Bentirash b. Rahamrea' (?) Witness
Shallum b. Hoshaiah. 20 (Endorsement.) Deed (relating to) the portico
which he built, which Koniya wrote for Mahseh.
Line 1. Elul = Pahons. The equation of the Jewish and Egyptian
dates is usual. See Introduction, p. vi. CIN^'n, in 21 cn^'n.
Line 2. The parties are both described as Aramaeans of Syene. In
63 &c. Mahseiah is called a 'Jew in Elephantine', and in 68 Koniya is
also called a Jew. The terms seem to be used almost indiscriminately,
but it is noticeable that, although we have six instances of 3*3 *t vnn\
we never find J1D '•T HW, and though there are ten cases of J1D if VDIK,
there are only three of y2 *I ""Ens. This can hardly be accidental, and
points to Elephantine as the specially Jewish settlement. 7i\?, a
frequent term. S-C bi"h in the sense of ' depending on ', in which case the
b)~\ b))2 (1. 9) was a cliens depending on a patronas. Cf. Exod. n8.
Though this view might be defended, it is perhaps better to read, as
is now generally agreed, bl?, cf. G. B. Gray in J. Q. JR., II, p. 92 + .
It is then a military term (1) 'standard', (2) 'detachment',1 commanded
by the man whose name (always Persian or Babylonian) follows it. Cf.
the a-qfjiia (a-rjfiaia, a-rjfxfiov) in Ptolemaic Greek papyri. The explanation
is not without difficulty, for the degel of Warizath here (in 471) appears
also in 153 (441), and perhaps in 282 (410), in each case relating to
Aramaeans of Syene. We can hardly suppose that any one man could
command it for sixty-one years. Several men are described in different
documents as belonging to two degalin, which may mean that they were
transferred from one detachment to another. The persons belonging to
a degel nearly all have Jewish (or other foreign) names, but see 73
(reading not certain). Native Egyptians are never so described. This
may be accidental, but it may also be that Egyptians were not employed
as soldiers in the garrison. The degalin (composed of Jews) formedthe
garrison (KPTl), or an important part of it, in Elephantine-Syene. They
were settled there with their families, and were capable of holding property
(koltoikoi). Their military duties seem to have been secondary and slight,
though they received rations and pay, as a retaining fee. The native
population seems to have been purely civil. See further in the Intro-
duction, p. viii, and for a-rj^ia, see Lesquier, Les Institutions militaires de
VEgypte (191 1), p. 103, &c. Dtni, a Persian name. The parties
1 This vague term is used because there is no indication of its number.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 5
13
belonged to the same detachment. E1H3* a mistake for TfSV, one of
the many mis-spellings in these texts. Stenning compares 'H^S for
^i-13 in Sinjirli, P 16.
Line 3. -|En!\ A Hebraism, commonly used to introduce the business.
Line 4. "UX or "UN is feminine. The word has been much discussed,
but no convincing explanation has yet been found. As 13X it has been
compared with Bab. agurru 'brickwork', or "i:PK 'roof. As "UN, Barth
{Rev. S/m., 1909, p. 149) compares jUl, and irfttN (Amos 9°), a lower
building contrasted with vnvj/D. Lidzbarski thinks it was possibly a
succa (in Elul), but it seems to be something more permanent. From
the description it must be some sort of archway or covered passage on
or over which the lessor has the right to build. The following plan
of the buildings has been made by Hoonacker (Schweich Lectures,
p. 14):
N
Jl J jCr^X^a AlKHK^fc-c oCl» j
14 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 5
The passage between the houses is called jnn in, 1. 3, meaning the gate
and the way to it. The lessor Mahseiah grants the right to build there,
but the building, as a fixture, is to be his property as ground landlord (or
tenant-in-chief?). wbyb. The 'upper part' is the end remote from
the house of Zechariah, i. e. at the South.
Line 5 was inserted after 1. 6 was written, because 1. 4 was not
sufficiently definite. Hence it is partly a repetition. fS\ NJHN JO. The
posts or pillars supporting the ~I3K were to be fixed against the side of
the house (pal ' attached ' to it). mat was son of Nathan (87). The
house afterwards passed to his son TiVH (25s).
Line 6. The usual formula. ?m&t. Only the imperfect occurs in
these texts, and in the forms ^>n3"> and ?3* (cf. i4), which are probably
only varieties of spelling. In BA the participle alone has the fuller
form (-?i!l?) : the other parts have been influenced by the Hebrew ?3\
See further//?^ S, 1920, p. 182. In these texts it is always followed
by an imperfect. "by either ' upon ' or ' above '.
Line 7. On the money see Introduction, p. xxii. A penalty is part of
the common form. "T a mistake for "pT, cf. 11. 10, 11.
Line 8. DBN a strengthened form of f)N, as D3T (92) of *JT. '31 mm ~I3
is again common form.
Line 9. nnpl for imp by31, a full citizen as distinguished from b))2
bil, K\rjpovxo<; (here translated ' soldier ' for convenience). HDn07.
The use of b to mark the object is not common in these texts. It is
probably inserted here for greater clearness, and then repeated in 13?.
Note the change to the third person. The name is shortened (familiarly)
from Mahseiah.
Line 10. DiTiD , ♦ , *T 'whoever of them' restrains? or 'whoever
(restrains one) of them ' ?
Line 1 1 . nb]} *W repeated for greater precision. Mahseiah was free to
build on top of the portico, but not under it.
Line 12. n»N, 1st pers. sing, imperf. The right to build above
it being settled, the next clause deals with the right to use the gate
and passage under it.
Line 13. rWiyUBB, an Egyptian name. The Jews were not restricted
to a particular quarter or ghetto. Nri70. He was a Nile boatman.
His son (610-11) followed the same calling.
Line 14. pj*2 T is used inaccurately. The street was not between the
houses of Koniya and Mahseiah, but only a passage (with the "UK), unless
that is now called a p1K>. The phrase no doubt means (as in 1. 13)
the street ' between our houses and that of Peft'onith '.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 5 15
Line 15. The deed is drawn up at the direction of the lessee. ~|2
vns\ The family may have been professional scribes, since no. 1 1 was
written by Gemariah b. Ahio. In io22 Ahio b. Pelatiah, a witness, is
probably a son of the present scribe. DS3 or DC ?]} the regular phrases,
' at the dictation of. 133 cf. on 20.
Lines 16-19. The names are signed by the witnesses themselves, and
are therefore difficult to read. Note the mixture of Jewish, Persian,
Babylonian, and perhaps other names.
Line 16. jT"l3nt? a Persian name, of which ,orQ~"tfVw> (Ezra 56, &c.) is
no doubt a corruption. vinx (though ^nn5 is possible), as in 1318.
Halevy, however, points out that if it is Assyrian it should be *innt$>N, if
Aramaic or Arabic, v"iny. Peiser suggests Atarliu. Cf. '•pnj, 1. 18.
Line 17. psms is no doubt intended, but it is written jnms.
Line 18. rnJ3 Persian. His father's name is Babylonian. "•7133
' Nabu is my god ' or 'is mighty '. The mark before it may be a false
start, or a mark of division. Stenning suggests that it is a bad B>,
for Tfl35> which stands before the other names. NUTI. Lidzbarski
thinks a short form of Dargman (62), cf. 1319. It may be ttxil
AaSctK^s, Persian.
Line 19. B>*"irU3 a strange name. There seems to be no other way of
reading it. jn6rn uncertain. The papyrus is broken. Cf. CIS.
ii. 1. 1547.
No. 6.
Conveyance. 465 B.C.
The date is the 2 1 st year of Xerxes, which is stated to be the 1 st year
of Artaxerxes (i), i.e. 465 b.c
It is an agreement between Dargman and Mahseiah (cf. 52) concerning
the right to certain property. Dargman claimed a piece of land which
Mahseiah also claimed. The matter being brought before the court,
Mahseiah was required to take an oath in support of his claim, pre-
sumably because there was no evidence. Dargman now submits to the
ruling of the court against him, and this deed is drawn up at his direction.
Reference is made to it in 823, when the property passed to Mibtahiah.
Such an oath was a common form of legal procedure, see nos. 7, 44, 45.
It was used in Babylonian law, see the Code of Hammurabi (ed. Winckler)
§§ 20, 249, &c. Clermont-Ganneau compares also 'ankh (scmkh) in
Egyptian law.
The writing is not very skilful. Note too the great variation in the
number of letters in a line. The papyrus is ajmost^ perfect. £
16 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 6
Sayce and Cowley, pap. B.
na Knaibo cni \i nw ninn!? \ III [III m} in )bDib II III ///->a i
mn« »r *»nn penn na jon -ibk nxonaa an^ xabo K'Dwrnx 2
a1 m»aa 1 *w nTP na iTonob uamx ^ni> Tau sni^a a»a 3
■jnroRi n3N xn-ra a»a untie wa ^ n[so> tdiA npm tnt 4
Dip nnan^y yby n^ap roic n *b«r xpnx ^>y III b -pai 5
NpiN* nan^y insa Nowb hkeid >b -pjym n»an nmaa riTon 6
T tcpiM noinn xn pjn njx nh ^t }Bm!> pnx nin n^> »ra -jr 7
p-re na rroip n^arfn]^ t"£K> yiob jom ?rva manby *? nxc »! 8
nniK "ia rr-^fr] n*ai ni> cap anyoi? pfinntc tnb w 9
n^iytaaa na nMDN rr»ai ni> n^nnnb mm $>:n!> nin* 10
naaim in*a *t nxro1' nb n*tyb K*pp n*» *t nbo n
nnai *inai nj« ami jn in:N tnau ^ it np*in ^y *aab 12
p-nni nnp ^ nnxi nx
pnm anp *p nnxi nx *p nnai n^nai njx y xpnx by *b 13
^asa }^vy in -3 f^na epa p jna* "jr xpnx *»e>a inr »? 14
}d p*nn mxi i^r dsx xpnxi xnncy^ II n epa xa^E 15
Id NisD mix "ia fn*K ana it xynx nanV'T^ f&ap* *? p b 16
nnp Dwnoa na yon nnc pm nsa Nnn*a pDa rot 17
ypin ia cbwn vns* ia m»3 nnc bna* "ia tinj 18
x^aa nimn nnp pDODiaa na tbwd 19
n'-jjy ia n^nj *in^ 20
nonDiiK na nbwik nnc 21
Endorsement. n^DnD i> p^nn na [fern] ana >r pnno nsD 22
1 On the 1 8th of Chisleu, that is the 7th day of Thoth, in year 21, the
beginning of the reign when 2 King Artaxerxes sat on his throne, said
Dargman b. Harshin the Khofasmian, whose station 3 is fixed in Yeb the
fortress, of the detachment of Artabanu, to Mahseiah b. Yedoniah a Jew
who (lives) in the fortress of Yeb, 4 of the detachment of Warizath, saying :
You have sworn to me by the God Ya'u in Yeb the fortress, you and
your wife 5 and your son, three in all, about my land in regard to which
I lodged a complaint against you before 6 Damidata and his colleagues
the judges, and they imposed upon you an oath to me, to swear by Ya'u
in regard to this land, 7 that it was no longer the land of Dargman, mine,
that is (belonging to) me. Now these are the boundaries of this land
8 in regard to which you^swore to me : My house, of me Dargman, is to
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 6 17
the east of it, and the house of Koniya b. Zadok, ° Jew, of the detach-
ment of Athroparan, to the west of it, and the house of /^saniah b.
Uriah, 10 Jew, of the detachment of Warizath, at the lower end of it, and
the house of Espemet b. Peft'onhh, u boatman of the cataract, at the
upper end of it. You have sworn to me by Ya'u, and have satisfied
12 my mind about this land. I shall have no power to institute suit or
process against you, I and my son and my daughter, 12a brother and
sister of mine, relative and stranger, 13 concerning this land, (against) you
and your son and your daughter, brother and sister of yours, relative and
stranger. u Whoever sues you in my name concerning this land, shall
pay you the sum of 20 (twenty) karash royal weight, 15 at the rate
of 2 R to the ten, and the land is assuredly yours, and you are quit of
lf5 all claim that they may bring against you in regard to this land.
Ethan b. Aba wrote this deed n in Syene the fortress, at the dictation of
Dargman. Witness, Hosea b. Petekhnum. Witness, 18 Gadol b. Yigdal.
Witness, Gemariah b. Ahio. Meshullam b. Hosea. 19 Sinkashid b.
Nabusumiskun. Witness, Hadadnuri the Babylonian. 20 Witness, Geda-
liah b. Ananiah. 21 Witness, Aryisha b. Arusathmar. 22 (Endorse-
ment.) Deed of renunciation written by Dargman b. Harshin for
Mahseiah.
Line 1. The number in the Egyptian month is broken, and the space
requires something before \|||, most probably III, but it might be ~>
(making 14). Gutesmann and Hontheim calculate that it should be
17, but there is hardly room for Ml -».
Line 2. ptJHn "12 }C3TJ apparently Persian names. "Win if it
means ' of Khwarizm ' is a strangely modern form, for ^». in the Persian
of to-day is pronounced kh. mDN. Noldeke is probably right in
taking this as ' place ', i. e. ' his station '. So I. Le'vi and Clermont-
Ganneau. Hale'vy, 'whose land is cultivated in Yeb '. Cf. 1319, where
see note.
Line 3. *rsy must then be ' made ', ' fixed '. as Noldeke. But the
expression is strange. rVDflO in 52 was an Aramaean of Syene, but in
both places he belongs to the degel of Warizath. The property was
evidently in Elephantine.
Line 4. n[K»]\ Traces of XE make this certain. Mahseiah, as a
Jew, swears by Ya'u before a Persian court, and his oath is accepted
by the court and by his opponent, who was not a Jew. On the name,
see Introduction, p. x. NJTV2 is probably right. It looks like »p1K3,
but the tail is too long for p, and the preposition would then be by-
Moreover, 1. 5 makes it superfluous.
Line 5. *]"Q probably Gemariah, 918.
Line 6. Damidata7 a Persian, was president of the court. nnua
2509 C
1 8 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 6
are his assessors, cf. Ezra 5°, &c. N"y"l as Ezra 40. "Ii:yt3 ' they
laid upon you ', i. e. required you to take.
Line 8. 'n n:x W3. The scribe originally wrote 'l JV2, and altered it
for greater clearness, since Dargman retained the adjoining house. He
forgot at first that he was writing in Dargman's name. The boundaries
of the property, to be consistent with no. 5, must include Mahseiah's
house, which may have been the cause of the action. As the properties
are in the same group as in no. 5, it is probable that Darga there (518) is
a short form of Dargman. iTilp in 52 is an Aramaean of Syene, of the
detachment of Warizath.
Line 10. HTinn^, the lower side is the north, as rv^y^ (1. 11) is the
south. rWiyiaas, not 'U1Q as S-C, is no doubt the same as in 513.
His son Espemet carried on the same business, cf. 22, 3s, 47.
Line 11. K^p S^ft 'the difficult waters', no doubt the cataract of
Assuan. On the navigation of it, see Hdt. 229.
Line 12. *p*UN, cf. on i4. Here with double accusative. *9"0 as
one word, so "]^"12 1. 13, iT"Q*l?J? 1. 8, and often.
Line i2a inserted as an afterthought.
Line 13. fON &c. resuming the pronoun in "]3"UK. The construction
is clumsy but clear.
Line 14. »DB>2 i. e. acting for me. fny not jriJK as S-C. ~% is
badly made. It is like that in i1, and confirms the reading there.
Line 15. NmtJ>y/ll*1. See Introduction, p. ssn pTn 'removed
from ', i. e. quit of, or guaranteed against. ^
Line 16. fisty, cf. 1. 5, a technical term, 'lodge a complaint', 'bring
an action'. Here with a cognate accusative. KJT1K as in no. 5,
though KpIN is used in 1. 15 &c. fJVN probably, cf. 1 Kings 431. Not
irPN, which is not a known name.
Line 17. }1D3. The court was held in Syene, though the parties both
belonged to Elephantine, and the property was also there. The
names are written by the witnesses themselves. DIJnDD 12 W)n a Jew
whose father has an Egyptian name. Was he a proselyte ? Or did a
Jewess marry an Egyptian and give her son a Jewish name ? In later
times Jews had no objection to using foreign (even theophoric) names,
as Isidore, sometimes as alternatives to their Hebrew names, so that
Petekhnum may have been a Jew. Cf. 152, and note on 25s.
Line 18. Vns* "12 Pinoa, the scribe of no. 11.
Line 21. The names are unknown.
Line 22. pniD ' withdrawal ' or ' renunciation ' of claim.
19
No. 7.
A Case of Btirglary. 461 B.C.
The date is the fourth year of Artaxerxes. Sachau takes this to be
Artaxerxes I, on the ground that in the time of Artaxerxes II (404-.-5.58)
Egypt was in revolt and therefore documents would not be dated by
Persian regnal years. Cf. no. 35, dated in the fifth year of Amyrtaeus,
about 400. The argument is not conclusive, because the history of the
revolt is obscure and we do not know how far the Persians may have
retained a hold on the country, e.g. in the south at Elephantine, or
whether some sections of the people (e. g. the Jews)' may have remained
faithful to Persia. On the whole, however, the earlier date (461 b. c.) is
more probable than the later (401). The name of the defendant,
Phrataphemes b. Artaphernes (1. 3), about which there can be little
doubt, occurs also in 517 as a witness in 471 b. c. (The Malchiah, whose
son is a witness in nos. 8 and 9, in 460, may or may not be the same as
the plaintiff here). The^style of the writing, though at first sight it
appears tobe late, is not^decjsive. On the other hand the degel of
Nabukudurri occurs elsewhere only in 29s (about 409 b. c.) and 352 (about
400 b. a). It seems, however, that the name of a degel could go on for
a long time, whatever the explanation, since that of Warizath is mentioned
in nos. 5, 6, 14, 15, 28, i.e. from 471 to 410 b. c. It is therefore more
probable that the degel of Nabukudurri should have lasted for sixty years
than that there should have been two men of the name of Phrataphemes
b. Artaphernes (if that is right) with an interval of seventy years between
them. Still it must be admitted that the date is not certain.
The precise form of procedure here is not clear, owing to the broken
state of the papyrus. It is usually taken as a case of an oath of exculpa-
tion, where, if evidence was not obtainable, the defendant was required
to swear that he had not committed the offence alleged against him.
Cf. no. 6. If, however, the restorations proposed here are correct, the
case is rather thus : Phrataphemes had boasted that he had trespassed on
Malchiah's property, &c. Malchiah now requires him to retract his
statements on oath, and will then have the right to take further pro-
ceedings, the nature of which is unknown owing to the loss of part of the
papyrus.
In general compare nos. 6, 16, 44, 45.
Sachau, plate 26. Ungnad, no. 28.
3*3 [KJS^D PDBTimN \/// WC 'BMsb // /// III ">1 I
3*3 \Dr\nn »din map *n rrsta iok wrw 2
c 2
ao ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 7
b]rb p[an-w -n] psn[-»ab n]naiaa fc[n!> Knv]a 3
<n>33] n[^>y fn] ttasa [^y n»]Tp na|>] no[>$> nrojaa 4
"n*n id npun jDna |D33i wuMfr nspnai jDna 5
info ^>y SnpDi [jepuw nn5y [n]cs^ nnph 6
fon*3onn ^y ^ mp* ma^D ran iena ^y ndo 7
n^y [tb] 1^22 pro [no]x^> \"i fb[pa] pa anfo 8
nnp^> n^» j[Dn]a in»a jo rpaai nt^ns n^ [-|fo] Knrux^ 9
ni]p"k sjn ^[n3N] nfo n»op[j] pa ■£ nnp [nas] jm 10
1 On the 1 8th of Paophi, in the 4th year of Artaxerxes the king, in Yeb
2 the fortress, said Malchiah b. Joshibiah, Aramaean, holding property in
Yeb 3 the fortress, of the detachment of Nab.ukudur/7', to P/irj2t^9ernes
b. Artap/iernes of the detachment 4 of Nabukuaurrt, raying : You declared
concerning me in Nepha that you entered my~liouse 5 by force, and struck
my wife, and removed goods from my house by force, 6 and took them
for jyoursetf. I have made a petition and the appeal to our god 7 has
been laid upon me by the court, on me Malchiah, that I should challenge
you by Herembethel 8 the god, before 4 fudges (?), thus : ' I did not enter
your house by force, 9 and did not strike your wife, and did not take
goods from your house by force' 10 And if /challenge you before these
y«dges (?) I am entitled also to challenge . . . a^mm^ ^s+ c\.
Line 2. JDnno, the regular word for • holding property '.
Line 3. The beginning is certain. In the defendant's name the
letters pen are certain. Of his father's name only p remains. It is not
O, as Sachau and Ungnad read, and what they take as * after it is an
accidental mark, of which there are several in this papyrus. Also their
proposed ^[ns] would not fill the space, nor would there be room for
anything between it and the name. A name ending in pan must belong
to a Persian, who would not be described as an Aramaean. Hence
p .... "13 pan . . b seems certain, and the restoration highly probable.
Line 4. [m3]l33. Sachau and Ungnad read ... no. In this hand
33 are very like o, but 123 is more probable, though it need not necessarily
be completed as in 1. 3. If it is Nabukudurri, both parties belonged
to the same degel. This is expressed in 204 by N^3"1 DDT?, cf. 92.
-)0[n^]. The tails of no are clear. \b n^jlp or bv- The restoration
is quite conjectural. The preceding n:[«] can hardly be anything else.
Then these words must introduce the accusation, and the introduction
is put into the mouth of the accused. Since he is afterwards required to
deny the charge, it should be introduced here by something like ' you
stated ' or ' you did '. But of course it might be another clause in the
charge, which is not recited in 11. 8, 9. It might, however, be [p]lp,
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 7 21
or ' you attacked me ' (or something similar) in N. and entered. ND33
is fairly certain. Traces of & are visible. In 204 there is NS3 JH3.
Here it seems to be a place-name. }n is quite conjectural. The traces
of letters make nothing. The fragment of papyrus here and in 1. 3
seems to be out of place as the traces are not in the line. ^[^V]
[TO] is required by 1. 8. So Sachau. Ungnad reads , , , 2 . (i. e.
['JVjafa]), but the mark is merely accidental.
Line 5. pro cf. ptrjD in i65>8,9, where Seidel takes the 3 as otiose.
It seems here to be like a kaph veritatis (perhaps JDina) 'as (with)
violence ', i. e. violently.
Line 6. rn5y. So Sachau and Ungnad. The 12 are badly written,
but nothing else seems probable. N*np»l [N]i>W evidently technical
terms. They belong to different clauses. }H7N ' our god ' (as Sachau).
Not tvrbn ' the gods '. It can hardly be a Hebraism, like tftl7M used as
a proper name.
Line 7. mx, asyndeton, ' so I M. challenge'. PKITO&in. On this
and other gods, see Introduction, p. x.
Line 8. fPjpj] ' avengers ', i. e. judges, is Sachau's suggestion, and so
in 1. 10. It is not very satisfactory. Ungnad points out that one would
expect Dip before it, but pa is not impossible.
Line 10. After fni Ungnad suggests N?, but the apodosis with f)K
makes this impossible ' if I do not challenge, then I shall also challenge '.
Sachau suggests X? or H3N. I thought of 1? fni as in Ahikar, 1. 81, &c,
but there seem to be faint traces of ii3N. It is much to be regretted that
the rest is lost, so that we do not know the subsequent procedure.
No. 8.
Conveyance. 460 B.C.
The papyrus is almost perfectly preserved, except for a crease in the
last third of the breadth which causes a doubt as to a few letters.
The date is the 6th (Gutesmann and Hontheim 5th) year of
Artaxerxes 1 = 460 b.c. Artaxerxes I (not II) is certain because it
relates to the same persons who appear in no. 6, of the first year of
Artaxerxes I = 465.
The sentences are sometimes divided by extra space.
Mibtahiah, daughter of Mahseiah, was about to be married, or had just
been married (I. 7), to jezaniah b. Uriah. Her father gives her as
dowry a property in Elephantine, with full powers to dispose of it. The
22 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 8
property is carefully described, and Mibtahiah's rights are elaborately
safeguarded. It is the same estate to which Dargman had laid claim in
no. 6. That document is now handed over to Mibtahiah as part of the
title-deeds.
Sayce and Cowley, D.
JT»DnD "ION X3^0 C'D£Timx \// \// nw ymao^> I m* in ^D^h I "3 3 I
nmoao p:b nnoiri bxib xnnu as3 janno rvjw hot "U 2
mn "6n pin \ rta mio3i "na ^ nan* mx nox^ nnna 3
xyio jo tiq I "pai \// ~> |ox nW rrnnn |o nans* nnnt^o 4
pmn -13 pAnn rva n^ n^y 'mbtrin xntyya I ■» jck 3nyo^> 5
-13 jp rva nb b>ob> xyio P*re 13 rraip rva n^ nmnnjpan 6
rv:iyoaa na noaDx rva n^ anyo ?ro na irnat n^i ^ya nmx 7
mioai "na '•a? nnan* mx pis* -j^t xrpa ww n"o 1 n?o. 8
n pb ww wax a^>y nyi mi xov jo na ncbp nox 9
nn:xi nnxi nx pnnx nnai -13 ^ nvx i6 . \mx) *nonn 10
n a^y ny "a^ai »ru» jr& ."jr xpnxa o^t? 'pnx Vxi i i
xp-ix a^3 »abn t^xi -ob nnai n3i tun fahm n ♦aiani 12
wah ^ jrw pi jad ^y f>a>i ^ nan* n *jr 13
aan xh pn x^i xnn^ II n spa xa^o ^3x3 mci in -» |tna cjoa 14
»a^y ppa^ ptanavxh / ^annx wah aax Wa xnm 15
xnaahT pnx c^x^ |jwd$> t,t -xp-ix by *o&>3 pmjn mn naa 16
pa np&n* xbi nnana ma xi?inw ana *a^y ppaai? n 17
^nx x^> pnx av> ix nno n*ano ma f]xi »3T3 put xnaai 18
••nonn n }oi? »ani ^,^rit Npnx pnnx^ jnaob ■ojo 19
' w nan1- x^'n?:Ni 33ni pn '•aai'nx pnx dv ix nno m 20
pn xb) . xrin^yi? // n p]D3 xa^o "aaxa ■» j^ia epa Ha? jn:x nj« 2 1
^aaa^njr xnaovpnvx xh pna inxi aax ^ajT'a xn^ai 33n x^i 22
by ^ana .x^ornn p^nn na jom t I pnno naa ,,n',x pjx 23
,, n^nxo^i , n^nryo xoiovx^n anp nby ntj»n na n,r xpnx 24
^a^ nnan^ ma n,r xnao ^ann ana pnno naai , *n*bn na 25
ne'T nbn na ix ;o:nn pnx av ix nno ;n \naann m^x 26
mcnny'ana noy niy pn n^3pS '"psjn -jr xnaD t,t xn'-a ^27
1A3 KTiTW n^ano aaa xnn^a poa n:r xnaa pxnri3j na 28
pj n3 nnat nnts» n"ano na nnoa iw 29
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 8 23
-13 r\"W2 ine> tibvn in nnar nntr ri^a in yen *inu> 30
rpDno "ia n\n> ini? rvrr in rpyct? *inB> n^o 31
ppjbx in tot mjy -o yna nn&> 32
nw na ddto nnc mm "O swiri nnc? 33 »
^w "in vein W 34
Endorsement. .T'JjT' na nDnn [an» *T l]*3 "1BD 35
nono rna ntaaoij 36 ^t^«
-■ ^* ""•_#^_— - — ■ — ti/fi*'
1 On the 21st 0/ Chisleu, that is the 1st day of Mesofe, the 6th year "t^u.*
of Artaxerxes, the king, said Mahseiah 2 b. Yedoniah, a Jew holding ^*
property in Yeb the fortress, of the detachment of Haumadata, to
Mibtahiah, spinster (?), 3 his daughter, as follows : I give to you for my
lifetime and after my death a house and land of mine. 4 Its measurement
is: its length from the lower to the upper end 13 cubits and 1 hand-
breadih ; width from east 5 to west 1 1 cubits by the measuring-iod ;
its boundaries, at the upper end of it the house of Dargman b. Harshin
6 adjoins it; at the lower end of it the house of Koniya b. Zadok; east
of it the house of Jezan b. 7 Uriah, your husband, and the house of
Zechariah b. Nathan ; west of it the house of Espemet b. Peft'onith
8 boatman of the cataract. This house and land I give to you for my life-
time and after my death ; 9 you have full rights over it from this day for
ever, and your children after you. To whom 10 you wish you may give
it. There is no other son or daughter of mine, brother or sister, or other
11 woman or man who has rights over this land, except you and your
children for ever. Whoever 12 shall institute against you suit or process,
against you or son or daughter of yours or any one belonging to you on
account of this land 13 which I give to you, and shall appeal against you
to governor or judge, shall pay to you or to your children 14 the sum of
10 (that is, ten) kerashin, royal weight, at the rate of 2 R to the ten, and
no suit or process (shall lie), 15 and the house is your house assuredly and
your children's after you ; and they shall have no power to produce,
against you 16 any deed new or old in my name concerning this land
to give it to any one else. Any deed 17 which they produce against you
will be forged. I shall not have written it and it shall not be accepted by
the court 18 while this deed is in your hand. And further, I, Mahseiah
will not to-morrow or on any other day take it away 19 from you to give
it to others. This land is yours. Build (on it) or give it to whom you
will. 20 If to-morrow or on any other day I institute against you suit or
process, and say I did not give it to you, 21 I will pay you the sum of
10 kerashin, royal weight, at the rate of 2 R to the ten, and no suit
22 or process (shall lie), but the house is your house assuredly, and (if)
I go into court I shall not win my case while this deed is in your hand.
23 There is also a deed of renunciation which Dargman b. Harshin the
Khorazmian wrote for me concerning 24 this land, when he laid claim to
it before the judges and I took an oath to him and swore to him 25 that
it was mine, and he wrote and gave me a deed of renunciation. This
24
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 8
ii
deed I give to you. 2G You are to take charge of it. If to-morrow or
another day Dargman or his son should lay claim 27 to this house,
produce this deed and in accordance with it contest the case with him.
' Atharshuri 28 b. Nabu-zira-ibni wrote this deed in Syene the fortress
at the dictation of Mahseiah. Witnesses hereto : 2<J Witness, Gemajjah
b^Jklahseiah. Witness, Zechariah b. Nathan. M Witness, Hosea b.
Pelaliah. Witness, Zechariah b. Meshullam. Witness, Ma'uziah b.
31 Malchiah. Witness, Shemaiah b. Yedoniah. Witness, Yedoniah
KJVlahseiah. 32 Witness, Nathan b. Ananiah. Zaccur b. Zephaniah.
33 Witness, Hosea b. Re'uiah. Witness, Mahseh b. Isaiah. :i4 Witness,
Hosea b. Yigdal. (Endorsement.) M Deed of a house which Mahseh
b. Yedom'tf^ gave 36 to Mibtah daughter of Mahseh.^
Line 2. Mahseiah here belongs to the degel of Haumadata. In
nos. 5 and 6 he is of the degel of Warizath. ]W2 applied to Mibtahiah
on her first marriage must be equivalent to Heb. nhro. Elsewhere only
in io2. S-C suggested a connexion with Arab, ^wli 'a young grown-
up person'.
Line 3. pnx \ fta. In g3 V2 pnx. S-C read *3 here also, but there
is an additional stroke, which seems to be part of a n lost in the crease.
The word is apparently used almost as a measure ' one house of land ',
i. e. the amount of land sufficient for one house, including the house upon
it, and hence much the same as ' a house and land '. It was a freehold
house, as no ground-rent is mentioned. TI1031 "ra. Epstein compares
B. T. Baba B. 153*.
Line 4. ^"lK 'its length', though Tlfi has no pronoun. Cf. Vncinn,
1. 5. ivbyh HTinn ]D, cf. 610. The ground was higher on_the south. &»
Line 5. NJ"ityjJ2 is not very distinct, but certain from 95. It must j
be some sort of measuring rod, though the Hebrew nt?J? means rather
a lump or plate of metal. Perhaps it was originally a plumb-line, and
then any sort of measuring line. Or it may be from the root riK'y
('think', 'calculate') if that ever meant to 'measure' (so Noldeke).
Jampel proposes ' singly ', ' each ' (cf. "i{J>j? TiE>y), which does not seem to
give much sense. Clermont-Ganneau thinks it may mean ' eleven ',
repeating the numeral, as in g5, but the 3 would be difficult.
Line 6. ]P a short form of TPW, as Mahseh for Mahseiah in 59 &cr-
Line 7. HCSDX cf. 610.
Line 8. N^p K*JD cf. 6n. p"iN "pr NTVS. S-C 'this house (islam
domtim) as an estate ', but cf. 1. 3. It probably is used loosely to mean
house and land, "pr is not *]T with 2 inserted (as Staerk), but m? with
*] added, ' this of yours ', though, speaking to a woman, it should be '•3?.
Line 10. pron has been taken (by Staerk and others) as a mistake for
HJ3n:n. But see note on }j?3B>N Ahikar 82.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 8 25
Line 11. Np"W = Xp"iX \ *2 in 1. 3. The land was the important part.
The house went with it. Note that land could be conveyed.
Line 13. fJD a Babylonian term (Jahiu), properly 'deputy' or 'repre-
sentative' of the king. If pi means 'judge', the two words indicate
two different authorities, the high court (of the NtTQ"), cf. 204), and the
local court. But it may mean 'magistrate and (his) court'. ?2p\ lit.
'complain against you [to] governor or judge'. It is used like "]3"I3N,
612. In 616 it is connected with }H ' law-suit '.
Line 17. P"G, in a court, i. e. in any court.
Line 18. N"1QD1 as in I. 22, 'while you hold this'.
Line 19. The space before NpiN shows that it begins a new sentence.
^2 ' build (upon it) ', i. e. lay it out.
Line 23. pmo ISD, i.e. no. 6, which is so called in the endorsement.
*73n3 as one word, and so in 11. 24, 25.
Line 27. HTy probably so. The 1 is in the crease. From ViJ? in the
same sense as fWl or mj .
Line 28. Noldeke ptnTCU, but cf. on 910.
Lines 29-34. The names are signed by the witnesses themselves.
Lines 35, 36. The endorsement is much broken. There is a trace of
3 before HDTO. Note the forms Mahseh and Mibtah, which are certain.
Was the divine name avoided on the exposed part of the document ?
Of the witnesses Gemariah (1. 29) and Yedoniah (1. 31) were the sons
of Mahseiah, the donor, and Shemaiah (1. 31) his grandson. Shemaiah's
writing is that of a young man. Yedoniah has the same name as his
grandfather.
No. 9. nt*&t$£
Deed relating to the Reversion of the Property in
No. 8. 460 b.c.
The papyrus is unusual in being written on both sides.
The year is the same as in no. 8, namely 460 B.C., and probably the
rest of the date, which is broken, also corresponds.
This is the complement of no. 8, dealing with the position of Jezaniah
with regard to the property settled on his wife by no. 8. By that deed
Mibtahiah was to have full rights to dispose of the property as she wished.
This is modified here by the provision that such rights only held good so
long as she remained the wife of Jezaniah. If Jezaniah improved
the property and Mibtahiah subsequently divorced him, the property
was to go to the children. If he divorced her, she was to take one
half (of the house) absolutely, and he was to have rights over the
other half with remainder to the children. In no case had Jezaniah
26 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 9
power to dispose of the property. As no provision is made for Jezaniah
in the event of Mibtahiah's dying while in possession of the property, it
would apparently go to the children. On the legal points as compared with
later Jewish practice, cf. Epstein, Jahrb. d. jiidisch-lit. Gesellschaft, 1909,
p. 359. The document does not seem to intend a distinction between
the house and the land, since the property is described first as one and
then as the other. This is intelligible if the explanation of plN* \ rV3 in
83 is correct. The land was the important thing. Or does 1. 1 1 imply
that the house could be divided but not the land ? The precise nature of
land-tenure, whether freehold or some sort of copyhold, is not stated.
At any rate there is no mention of a ground-rent or of a ground-landlord
(the State?).
Sayce and Cowley, C.
nox vebo BWnmK III III nae> y[niDo]7 [I qv in i]?[Da]? ['"^l3 I
iTDn»
K?jo Mm pp-ttN na nw? mum brh aS[a n «*nnj rwpp na 2
.Tnoao? nam n:n n nW wrap anyo ^ \ *a pnx wn noa? 3
Hfai lll-> ipic it wra nrv^p tannic n7riana naoi lnryic taia 4
nrpona nnyi m it Npnic pnnioic mono natc jyaicnpya \-»a 5
jnaoh mar? wn D*te N7 -pr icn»a jn7 innaic oy ua am 6
na ;b*7B> ran mna rwitiao p "pa \rb primb ncm 7
latuswri 'rn: nnx man it Np-is* pnic dv lie nno jn Dannie 8
jo -pa fn? fnnK7 nanaoh nrip7»7 ta no>7C N7 iao paani 9
f'wC. - bvann in nnay nax n Nnmay s£n, na ;oH?^ ion mnoao 10
elbn na b<7B> nas* [xajnnie iea7Si np?o7 h7 [rnsf] wr-a 27a *po u
nmoao }o T^a in ica7a ami ir iwvaa maa naie n iciaa 12
aam pn latnie pnic dv is* nno |n yim na }ta*7P ion 13
nas« put sna*D -jpnana N71 naao? n* Kpnic n^nam n? noai 14
aan npi pn nti Nnnta>y7 // n n02 ^apo *J3^a -» pna *pa 1? |nag 1 5
ww mono Daa xnma pDa na: mao jamma na msanny ana 16
jna na mat w n^a na yirin tip i:n 17
otaona nna? w mono n[a] nnoa nnc 18
nw na n*jnw nna> ma?o na nnyo nw 19
•tjbv na mar nnt? maay na ;na w mono na tot nnta> 20
myta" na nono iw nnyn [na] jwnn nnca> 21
?[n:> na y^]in w 22
^ /u <^~— fr*«* ^x^^x^-r
*«
/A*; foe**^**"
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 9 27
1 On the 21st of Chis\eu, that is the isl of Afesore, the 6th year of
Artaxerxes the king, said Mahseiah 2 b. Yedoniah Jew, of Yeb, of the
detachment of Haumadata, to Jezaniah b. Uriah, of the same detachment
3 as follows : There is the land of 1 house belonging to me, west of your
house, which I have given to Mibtahiah 4 my daughter, your wife, and
I have written for her a deed concerning it. The measurement of this
house is 13 cubits and a hand-breadth 6 by 11, by the measuring rod.
Now I, Mahseiah, say to you, lay out this land and rear cattle on it (?),
,; and dwell on it with your wife, but you have no power to sell this
house, or to give it 7 as a present to others ; but your children by
: Mibtahiah my daughter have power over it 8 after you. If to-morrow
or another day you lay out this land and then my daughter divorces you
:l and goes away from you, she has no power to take it or give it to
others, but your children by 10 Mibtahiah have power over it in return for
the work which you have done. If you put her away u from you, half
the house shall be hers to take, and as to the otlw half you have power
over it in return for 12 the improvements which you have made in this
house. And again as to that half, your children by Mibtahiah 13 have
power over it after you. If to-morrow or another day I should institute
suit or process against you u and say I did not give you this land to
develop, and did not draw up this deed for you, I 15 will pay you the sum
of 10 kerashin by royal weight, at the rate of 2 R to the ten, and no suit
or process (shall lie). 16 ' Atharshuri b. Nabu-zira-ibni wrote this deed in
Syene the fortress at the dictation of Mahseiah. Witnesses 1T hereto :
Witness, Hosea b. Pelaliah. Witness, ZechariaJ^ b. _Nathan. 18 Wit-
ness, Gemariah b. Mahseiah. AVitness, Zechariah b. Meshullam.
19 Witness, Ma'uziah b. Malchian. Witness, Shemaiah b. Yedoniah.
20 Witness, Yedoniah b. Mahseiah. Witness, Nathan b. Ananiah. Wit-
ness, Zaccur b. Zephaniah. 21 Witness, Hosea b. Re'uiah. Witness,
Mahseh b. Isaiah. 22 Witness, Yiosea b. YigdaX.
Line 1. [l]^[D3]b, the tops of the b's make this certain. The other
restorations are from no. 8.
Line 2. 3S[n] for y>2 only here. The S is probable. D3T ' that
very ' = ' the same '. The same intensive suffix as in DDK 5s.
Line 3. V3 p"iN, cf. 83. The 'Q is certain here.
Line 4. nirurD one word, as often in these two deeds. vmnx
' after it ', i. e. in consequence, or respecting it.
Line 5. \ ~> 2. The second dimension is introduced by 2 of which the
precise meaning is not clear. jya as frequently in letters, introduces
the' business after preliminaries. inyi. Probably X S-C read nnyi
and translate (from the context) 'stock (it) with', cf. Prov. 2427. So
Halevy ' multiply '. Noldeke reads "WV. but does not explain the con-
nexion. He thinks the "site was too small to support cattle, but the
dimensions of the house only are given. There may have been plenty
28 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 9
of land attached to it. We may perhaps compare the root of Hebrew
DHiny (Ass. atildu, Arab. ±yc) ' he-goats ', a good Semitic word, which
can be only artificially explained from iny ' to be ready '. In Ps. 509 it
is parallel to "ns and in 50™ to CTaK, in both cases implying animals
that are strong, i. e. well-fed or fattened. So also in explaining sys. and
X£ (' a well-bred horse ') the Arab lexicographers (see Lane) lay stress on
the quality of strength. Hence we may assume an extension of the
meaning of \/ *iny, or a separate root meaning ' to feed ', ' make strong ',
' rear (cattle) '. Cf. perhaps the various senses of V |1T. [Also perhaps •
Sumerian tud ' beget ' or ' bring forth ', utud ' offspring ', udu • sheep '.]
In general cf. Prov. 2723-127. nrvorD is very difficult. In the first
place norn is not used in Aramaic. If it is a Hebraism, which is possible,
the form is strange. The ' is clear. It may be a false start in making
a n, or the scribe may have been going to write an N to mark the long
vowel of the plural (nnorG). Then the final n cannot mark the emph.
st., which always ends in X. It can only be '■its cattle' referring to
NpIN if that be possible, for 'rear cattle on it'. Noldeke alternatively
suggests WVO rJ3 but does not explain. Or is it a Persian compound
of ham-, with the preposition 2 ? Then we should have to find another
meaning for "rny ("inj?), such as ' be happy in unity ', but that is hardly
probable.
Line 6. D33T7. Staerk's note here is very bad. ^)^Q is an impossible
form. Only the Peal happens to occur in BA, of course in the sense of
' buy '. This is Pael, which quite naturally means to ' sell '. It is to be
pointed f^?]?. The n is part of the form, not the pronominal suffix.
For the omission of the suffix cf. e.g. 819 jnsob.
Line 7. n»m ' as a gift ', cf. 2411'14 J»m3 ' in friendship '.
Line 8. "p&OKTi ' shall express her dislike for you ' and separate from
you. If it was her act, she was to have none of the property, but it was
to go to the children. No provision is made for the case of there being
no issue, nor for a trust if they were infants. NJC, as in 1523, is a
legal term for ' divorce '. Staerk quotes an Egyptian document of the
fourth century b. c. in which 'hate' is similarly used. In Hebrew cf.
Deut. 2 115, &c. In Ecclus. 42° /07 -n-ore fxia-qBrj where the Heb. (margin)
has N?.Ktfl. On the legal form, cf. Epstein, Jahrbuch d. jiidisch-lit.
Gesellscha/t, 1908, p. 368.
Line 10. hunn. Haphel a^ in 818. It should mean here, as there,
' take away ', and Epstein and Noldeke translate ' if she takes away from
you ' half the house, she has a right to do so. This seems very unlikely,
for the circumstances are not described under which she might take half
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 9 29
the house. The verbal form may be either 2nd or 3rd (fern.) person.
In BA, as in Hebrew, its natural meaning is to ' set free '. Provision has
already been made for the case of her divorcing him, and we want a
clause providing for the case of his divorcing her. In no. 15 there is
provision for three cases ; if she divorces him, she loses everything ; if he
divorces her, she gets compensation ; if he violently ejects her, she gets
a larger compensation. The two cases here must be the same as the first
two in no. 15. Then we must take ^VJnn as another term for divorce,
and translate ' if you set (her) free (i. e. put her away) from you '. (For
the idea of ' freedom' cf. the phrase in 152528 < she snau g0 away whither
she will '.) The suffix is omitted as in 818, though one would expect it
in both places.
Line 12. aim as in Syriac and late Hebrew, cf. i7. in NJ7D = Heb.
tonn J^sn. Only here and in 22120. Epstein thinks the insistence on
children by Mibtahiah shows that Jezaniah had another wife and perhaps
children.
Line 16 sqq. The scribe and witnesses are the same as in no. 8.
pX"in23 . The \3tr is certain here and hence to be so read in 828.
No. 10.
Contract for a Loan. 456 B.C.
A long document almost perfectly preserved. It was found (like no. 5)
still folded, tied and sealed. The writing is coarse, and several characters
(P, D, n, &c) are badly formed, so that there would be a difficulty in
reading some passages if the text were at all obscure or unusual.
The date is the 9th year of Artaxerxes I = 456 B.C. The document
is a contract for a loan to Ya'uhan, daughter of MSLK, from Meshullam
b. Zaccur (cf. 133 in 447 b. c.) and the conditions are set out with the
utmost care. They resemble those of no. n. If the interest was not
paid (by the end of the year ?) it was to be added to the capital and to
pay interest in the same way. If interest was outstanding at the end of
the second year, Meshullam could distrain on Ya'uhan's property. The
sum is only 4 shekels and the interest is 8 hallurin per month — as in
no. 11. If the relative values are rightly determined (see Introduction,
p. xxiii), this would be 60 per cent, per annum, a high but not unusual
rate at that date.
Sachau, plates 28, 29. Ungnad, no. 30.
tfDcrnmN \ll III \ll nap nirn rrvb I \ll dv in <ho£ \\\\ ///i 1
12 cbvzb «nT3 2* n pi i^?d ma [mrr mcK Kbn 2
. <nt*U«A (U»*
veri-"*^'
3°
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 10
{?p& f)DD ns? b nan< noN^ xnma a11 n mm mar
ksta *a3sa nyans in I ///
/b°
i~riff*' yl>*i>r*
bv mam nn^ansa
?t /f^*~~ II 111 III p^n f)D3 ron I nmb I ^pnb II p^n ep3
KBH3 xmano nam nbh^ wv3i» hud jn in rrvb
13032 ^p/Jf Nbl H3B» pan NU» [HI nH3 in 7
jb^p "pa d^o nax nar snaoa a*na *? nh»3i»i 8
ami ep3 pamr sa ^ naam n rany ^a i? npbnb 9
^roe>n n pr bi p:a pye' man nay ^rnsi cm 10
innta •]? ncs* !>3K s*h nn»anoi "jsDaa K*>enn ny 1 1
bpN i»3N n^i n,T3 nar Nnsoi nmanrai idd33 12
Nnaoi jany uo nnp^ o^ pm ud nnp n,^y 13
n"a-ioi put KDDua T/iebp sbi nms pi "jma na: 14
pi.nmamai nar Naoa n^ pd?B* ic.n ua 15
ty6p ntara nas nn^anni nsr nbd3 i!> id^b> n*S 16
K^nnny an^nsem n pnyi pr b •£ np^ 17
pD Dip T^J> l^apP |li»3» K^l rm*31131 T.3D33 18
ppmn tbi pn3 pa.m bjn nma nar tnsm pm 19
nar.NnDD uay n3 pa 3n3 mra nar n^ddi 20
W>a n3 ytris* nnt? iaa NHnsn pin11 rasa 21
ttw na mas iTi^b na vnx mha na mimn 22
lbw3 nna pirn nans t nr? spa nso 23 v
[m]ar n3 thvA t'lusi"}^^
1 On the 7th of Chisleu, that is the 4th day of the month Thoth, the
9th year of Artaxerxes 2 the king, said Ya'uhan daughter of Meshullak,
spinster (?), of Yeb the fortress, to Meshullam b. 3 Zaccur, Jew, of Yeb
the fortress, as follows : You have given to me as a loan the sum of
4 shekels, 4 that is four, by royal weight, at interest, which shall be due
from me 5 at the rate of 2 hallurin per shekel per month, being at the
rate of 8 hallurin 6 for each month. If the interest is added to the
capital, it shall pay interest like the capital, 7 both alike, and if there come
a second year and I have not paid you your money 8 and interest on it as
written in this deed, you, Meshullam, and your children, have the right 9 to
take for yourself any security which you may find of mine in the counting-
house, silver or gold, 10 bronze or iron, male or female slave, barley,
spelt or any food that you may find of mine, n till you have full payment
of your money and interest thereon, and I shall have no power to say to
you that I have paid you 12 your money and the interest on it while this deed
is in your hand, nor shall I have power to lodge a complaint 13 against
Endorsement.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 10 31
you before governor or judge on the ground that you have taken from
me any security while this deed u is in your hand. If I die without
paying you this money and interest thereon, 15 my children are to pay
you this money and interest thereon. If 1G they do not pay you this
money and interest thereon, you Meshullam have a right n to take for
yourself any food or security that you may find of theirs until you have
full payment 18 of your money and interest thereon, and they shall have
no power to lodge a complaint against you before governor 11 or judge
while this deed is in your hand. Even if they go to law they shall not
win their case 20 while this deed is in your hand. Nathan b. 'Anani
wrote this deed 21 at the dictation of Ya'uhan. Witnesses hereto :
Witness, Oshea' b. Gilgul. 22 Hodaviah b. Gedaliah. Ahio b. Pelatiah.
Agur b. Ahio. (Endorsement.) 23 Deed of money lent (?), which Ya'uhan
daughter of Meshullak wrote 24for Meshullam b. Zaccwr.
Line 2. jmn* fern, occurs several times. Cf. pnirT1 masc. "J^tTO
occurs several times, but its meaning and vocalization are unknown.
Sachau compares Phoenician or Punic ^ttvJD, and Ungnad "pWQW in
26s. If it is formed from a V ~p® (Meshullakh) that can hardly have
the meaning of the Hebrew "]?KJ. }t?3 as in 82. She could do business
in her own right.
Line 3. ri3T from v P|P, only in these papyri. Cf. Ahikar 130, &c.
Line 4. PlTWlM ' as its interest'.
Line 5. ^pn? the proper Aramaic form, cf. Dan. s25. In 1. 3 and else-
where bpy is always used = Bab. siklu. nin. The reading is clear,
but the asyndeton is strange. We should expect "in. Perhaps a mistake.
Line 6. FiOE fn, pregnant, if i] (is not paid and therefore) is added.
In 115 more explicitly CNT ni.T. No doubt this was the usual practice
and is here taken for granted. NBH i.e. KB*"?.. TOT attracted to
the gender of NtJ>~l, cf. on n5.
Line 7. *1PD *in 'one like one', i.e. both alike. PUtJ> p:n. The
construction is strange for 'a second year'. Sachau and Ungnad say 'n
means ' repetition '. For the first year unpaid interest (96 hallurin) added
to the principal would amount to a total of 6 sh. 16 hal.
Line 9. ply, Heb. pniy, 'pledge ', anything which represents money.
nr^Tl, cf. 11. 10, 17. No doubt to be so pointed, since it is always used
in Haphel. The Pi is frequently not written. Cf. 3710, 1312 (p23v) and
Ahikar 96 (ninn), &c. ^, i. e. ' belonging to me '. p:rW »3 as in 318.
Note no preposition.
Line 10. |1T apparently for }1T0, but not known elsewhere as a noun.
Line 11. N^cnn as in 217. "]SD3 is 'capital'. D^ is added above
the line as an afterthought.
Line 14. nrcaici. The n is added above the line for want of space.
32 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 10
Line 17. rosrn no doubt to be so read, as in 11. 9, 10. There is a
mark before the n which might be ' if the form rDBTP were possible. It
is like that in nrvom o5, so that both may be unintentional.
Lines 19, 20. Cf. 822.
Line 20. The same scribe as in 1317, &c.
Line 23. nn (not mi). Ungnad says = H3T, but this is impossible.
In CIS ii, 1, 17+ nn is explained as = Bab. dannitu = duppu 'docu-
ment '. Perhaps H3T is the abs. st. of this, in the special sense of
• contract ' (loan or sale), and was borrowed by Greek as Sai/os (for which
there is no satisfactory etymology) ; cf. anpafiwv from |U"iy.
No. n.
Contract for a Loan. About 455 b.c.
This was the first of the papyri brought from Elephantine and was
published in 1903 (see the account of it in PSBA 1903, p. 205) just after
no. 27 (ed. by Euting).
The writing is good, but the papyrus is badly broken, especially at the
beginning (the outside of the roll) so that some details are uncertain.
Several points, however, are cleared up by comparison with similar
documents in this collection. In general cf. no. 10. The date is lost
at the beginning, but there can be little doubt that it was written about
460-450 b. c. At that time Egypt was in revolt against the Persians,
and this may be the reason why the money is described as 'of the weight
of Ptah' (1. 2) instead of 'royal weight' as usually. The phrase would
equally well suit the time of the revolt about 400 b. c, but the earlier date
is required by the names. The scribe Gemariah b. Ahio is a witness in
618 (465 b. c.) but is not mentioned in later dated documents, and one of
the witnesses here, Mahseiah b. Yedoniah, is a party to no. 5 (471 b.c.)
and no. 15, but must have died soon after that (441 b.c). In 2518 the
witness Mahseiah b. Yedoniah is probably the grandson (416 b. a). The
deed must have been dated somehow. In the present first line there is
just room for >nbsb "OlE^K *n ^D *VDN and no more. Hence it seems
that there must originally have been a line before it containing the date.
[The small fragments at the top are merely loose scraps which were put
together there because they could not be fitted in anywhere. They do
not belong there and are not consecutive, so that it is useless to try to
make anything out of them.] In 1. 8 the debt is to be paid by the
9th year (probably). As M. Clermont-Ganneau points out, this can
hardly be the year of a king, because he might die in the meantime. It
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. n 33
might be the 9th year ' of the freedom of Egypt ', or the 9th year after
the deed was written. In the last case it implies a date at the beginning.
M. Clermont-Ganneau, who makes the shekel =192 hallurin, remarks
that the interest would be 1 2^ per cent, per annum, and would therefore
in eight years amount to as much as the original capital. This would
give a meaning to the number 9, and to cpir (1. 8), and it is possible that
the values here differ from those in the other documents. Comparing
no. 10, however, it is unlikely that the creditor would allow outstanding
interest to accumulate for eight years without distraining. See note on epjp
(1. 8). If the values are the same as elsewhere and are rightly ascertained
in the Introduction (p. xxiii) the interest wOuld be 60 "per ce'nt. per annum,
and the above argument does not hold.
Sayce and Cowley, L. Ungnad, no. 88.
sjm 'b rum [imb] mmv "o "i 1
II ]ibn «pa *by ram ->b\w spa nna ^a[ta] l[lll \bp&] 2
jvrno mnm [i]b MiobtPK n ov iy xrrvb \ e> epab 3
m -]b |H3n *6 *» vmw v msb [II III] III pbn iQDa 4
rrva m* i^ ^na]bhnn nrw wn hot rva-io 5
ba by T3J ^ anani ntom jo "6 P3[n]a* *» *dis [» 6
ba -]b n»b&> xb p ib obiro mnM n qtdi spa 7
1DD3 pjpy* \ll III [ill] rut? ninn rw ny nrranoi *pDa 8
* m»i> rw ^y rcn mi?! ^y ikitj\ *? nrraiDi 9
lb vurihs* n dv ny 10
•■tobw 13 ppy 12
mn,T in nxj? 13 «i^'
L 7*
mar 13 rrabo 15 L
n» snsD by 1 N^Tn^Da^y vnx na ronw nisd ana 16
1 .Sajtf X b. F to Z b. Yathma as follows : You have given me the sum
of 24 shekels by the weight of Ptah, at the rate of 1 shekel to 10, and
interest shall be due from me at the rate of 2 hallurin 3 for the sum
of 1 shekel per month, till the day when I repay it \.o you, so that the
interest on 4 your money shall be 8 hallurin each month. Any month in
which I do not give you 5 interest, it shall be (added to the) capital and
shall bear interest. I will pay it to you month by month G out of my
2599 d
34 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. n
salary which they give me from the treasury, and you shall write me
a receipt for all 7 money and interest which I pay to you. If I do not
pay you all 8 your money and the interest thereon by the month of Thoth
in the 9th year, your money shall be doubled (?) 9 and the interest on it
which is outstanding against me, and interest shall be due from me
month by month 10 until the day when I repay it to you. Witnesses :
11 'Ukban b. Shemesh-nuri. 12 Kozri b. Ya'hadari. 18 Mahseiah b.
Yedoniah. 14 Malchiah b. Zechariah. 16 Gemariah b. Ahio wrote the
deed before the witnesses who(se names) are upon this deed.
Line 1. [lEN?] can be restored with certainty from other deeds.
There is perhaps a slight trace of ? .
Line 2. [ppt?] must be restored, since the interest is in hallurin, but
the number of them is less certain. Four is most likely. When the text
was first published this seemed too small a sum for so formal a document,
but no. 10 now removes that objection. nDQ "02[N2] is right. Else-
where always sata ^3X3. The 'weight of Ptah' would be that used in
his temple at Memphis and no doubt represents the Egyptian scale (of the
revolt) as distinguished Wrom the Royal (Persian) weight. (So in
demotic documents frequently ' of the double house of Ptah.) ' The
standard is here described as 1 shekel to 10, whereas the ordinary
standard is 2 R to 10. If this means the proportion of alloy, the
standard of the revolt had twice as much alloy as before. \ B> is not
found in legal documents usually for 1 shekel.
Line 3. mnni i. e. ' so that it shall be '.
Line 4. The numeral must be under 10 and must be divisible by 2.
Therefore either 4 or 6 or 8. The space best suits 8. Therefore the
shekels in 1. 2 must be 4.
Line 5. EWi fttrv. The grammar is inaccurate. It ought to be
(rr)NrVn~lO and mnn as in 1. 3. The verb is no doubt attracted to the
gender of £>N*1 (cf. naT" in ioG). K>X*1 is the Hebrew form.
Line 6. *D*1S ' share ' ' portion ', i. e. wages. The debtor was still in
the employment of the provisional government, as he had been under the
Persian regime, and the same terms are used. Cf. 210, but there is no
mention here of ND^O IT'S or pa? »T "a . DJ must mean a ' note ', i. e.
a receipt. As an Aramaic word it occurs in the Samaritan Targum
Lev. i68-10 for Heb. 7"il3, and is no doubt there a loan-word from Arab,
oo. The meaning is hardly the same here, and I am still inclined to
take it (against Hale'vy) as a Persian form from {j^y (see PSBA 1903,
p. 207), a 'written' receipt. Johns (PSBA 1905, p. 187) cites an
Assyrian word nibzu in this sense, but with no Semrtie.ejym_ology.
Line 7. >21D should be nrPSIO as in 11. 8, 9 and in no. 10.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. ti 35
D^fO nin'M not common in this Aramaic (as later) for D^x. Cf. 1. 9
nan ow for rd-i\
Line 8. The numeral is certain since units are always grouped in threes
as far as they go. But the point of naming the 9th- year is not clear.
The 9th year from the date of writing is a long time for so small a loan.
If the deed was dated in the «th year of the freedom of Egypt (cf.
the Jewish coins of the revolt) the loan would only be for g-n years.
The nature of the penalty is not clear enough to help. It can hardly
be the 9th year of a king, though the 9th year of Artaxerxes I (456 b.c.)
would be a suitable date. *pW is very difficult. In 11. 4, 5 the out-
standing interest is to be added to capital. LI. 8, 9 are therefore
unnecessary unless Ppy adds a further penalty. In no. 10 the out-
standing interest in the first year is to be added to capital, but in the
second year the creditor might distrain. Here distraint is not mentioned,
but one would expect something corresponding. Perhaps f]py = i__ax^
in the sense of ' be doubled '.
Lines 11-16 are not arranged in the usual manner. L. 16 should
complete 1. 10, and the witnesses' names be written continuously. Cf. no. 1
and frequently.
Line 13. mn.T. Probably for mn 1iT ' Ya'u is my glory '.
Line 16. N~IDD is ' document ' not 'scribe' in both places. K*ini5> D3^y »
is unusual. It is generally DD?y or DM of one of the parties ' according '
to (instructions from) '. The Interested party said what he wanted
written, and the scribe put it into formal language. The witnesses would
hardly give such instructions, so that here perhaps DD?y means rather ' in
presence of. Why the name of the debtor is not given (as jn no. 10),
is not evident.
No. 1 2.
List of Names, undated.
There are several lists of names in the collection, but the purpose of
them is not always apparent. Some are connected with accounts. In
mediaeval Jewish communities lists of this kind were often drawn up
to commemorate members of the congregation who had suffered for their
religion.
It is undated. If it is a memorial list it may be related to no. 34
(about 407 b.c), which is probably connected with no. 30. Sachau,
however, points out that the sons of Menahem b. Posai (I. 7) are
mentioned in 2 278-79. As the name Posai occurs only in these two
D 2
0,6 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 12
documents, the persons are probably the same and this papyrus belongs
to the generation earlier than no. 22 (420 B.C.) i.e. about 440-450 b. c.
The writing is not very careful, and the reading of it is the more
difficult because the context affords no help.
Sachau, plate 17. Ungnad, no. 18.
pro in *:n 1
yg>Ta in join 2
Dirv "12 yew 3
Ann "12 XJtsw 4
*jin "12 yioe 5
,T-i3 -in |na 6
»D»s "12 nnjo 7
•T3TN 12 eW 8
n5y "12 2py^Nn,,2 9
///////// J[12]3 b 10
rcufclc cu * r
1 Haggai b. Nathan. 2 Harman b. Oshea'. 3 Oshea' b. Yathom.
4 Oshea' b. Hodav. 4 Shamua' b. Haggai. 6 Nathan b. Neraiah.
7 Menahem b. Posai. 8 Yeosh b. Azaniah. 9 Bethel'akab b. Achar.
10 Total 9 men. « Nabu'akab (?) b.
Line 1. Cf. 34s, Hosea b. Nathum and Haggai his brother.
Line 2. jc"in (or fcnn). The second letter is more like a T. Sachau
compares ]lo"in. It may be related to }ri3D*in, &c. It occurs also in
2 24 (the son of this man?). yeiX. The 1 is very unusual and the
f broken. ye^S is not possible.
Line 3. Cf. 34s.
Line 4. nin, as in 34s, &c. A short form of Hodaviah.
Line 8. rVOTN, in Neh. io10 the father of yie\ which looks like an
improvement of tJW here. It is parallel to m?(N)\ BW Sachau
thinks = HW.
Line 9. "by. Sachau and Ungnad "i?y, but r is impossible. It might
be a 3. In 1 Chron. 27 Achar is a variant of Achan in Jos. 71.
Line 10. The total shows that the list is complete.
Line 1 1 is not Egyptian (Ungnad), but Aramaic written upside down.
37
No. 13.
Conveyance of a House. 447 B.C.
The end is somewhat broken.
Its date is the 19th year of Artaxerxes (I) = 447 b. c.
It is a deed of gift of a house from Mahseiah to his daughter Mibtahiah,
in return for value received from her. As the parties are known from
previous documents, there can be no doubt that the year is that of
Artaxerxes I, not II.
It is another proof that a woman could hold property and transact
business independently of her father or (since Mibtahiah was married in
no. 8) her husband.
A peculiarity of this text is the number of mistakes in spelling, though
the scribe, Nathan b. Ananiah, must have been a professional notary,
since he also wrote nos. 10 and 15. The following are probably such
slips: 1. 2 rrnttBD (also elsewhere), 1. 4 DT32?, 1. 7, &c. ^1, 1. 10 331,
3ip, 1. 11 dn, 1. 12 prim, pay?, dd, 1.^4 nrr, Nptn? - />«<
Sayce and Cowley, E.
N3$>» PDB>nmN.III III III"' rut? yniDD mb ■» dv in i^ds^ III 3 1
13 rpDno ion
tsrpsb vb nsn11 n:x iznb nnn3 .TnDD^ ntm bub ;id *i nnK rMT 2
n^i? >^ 3n3 -iddi [s]niDn3 jid »t »oin "ids* "13 ni3r 13 bbwn b 3m n 3
nbass r»T33 rvm run n3 ^ rnrp ^r n^dsj «£n vn3 rrriDs»i> nram 4
^ naMirpaywriarp n:x nnx •'37 mobc? jcsji e|D3 nropn n?i irn 5
*^[3D3] V Np^l? N1BD vb n3i*N // /// |BH3 t|D3 »D*1 »3$>K '3*033 sj^n 6 ^
pjwah in *a5n rota npnm •oi? nrorp nito n:r ^nnnxfir ntao ^ 7 #*
-i3ji ^t y-in *33i rm i>3N n^ rw3wri""^n[Dm n p]\) "onnN jo 8
'3^ ri3D3 Nnapi [»]3^» raiv n:x n *]? snu d^3 33n1 p^gprv priN 9
nnp. ^y3i £n b[y3 p]*mi 3-ip nnxi nsi ri3N 331 pn ^anavr aby 10
i£D ^3^y ppjjr. priN 13: b* n^dn ^h dx rp3i -» jtrna sps >sb \rw 1 1
*6 dd iyby pw* "[r *]3$> rorw ri3n3 ru« n kibd rur p£ pnyi mn 12
[nran]3 nan
n^nnn n»i»w[a 13 v]w rvn nWy it nivs <einn r6« s*n sjn 13
D^3 Npci jj^in -13 bnj m nWra nba nm n K-n»j 14
ntv3 i? K»n[S>>< ti[di M]5n n tm it^D 13 ^noS p["»K] r6 bidb' 3nyo 15
38 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 13
ana <nan fayn [n] jobi o^y ny in ^n ruo npmi i? nnan* 16
s5a iTono ana ua Nflnssn ncno Daa-nar kibd rraaji -in jna 17
"ddd ^m« "in [jnanc]i momo ia niDino msa 18
n'yep ia [. . . . in#] sinx n "2Da »m ia nana ins? 19
rbv 13 nar 20
Endorsement. nni3 n[flBB£l] rrar 13 n^Dnea ISO 21
1 On the 3rd of Chisleu, that is the 10th day of the month Mesore,
year 19 of Artaxerxes the king, said Mahseiah b. 2 Yedoniah, Aramaean
of Syene, of the detachment of Warizath, to Miphtahiah his daughter, as
follows : I give you the house 3 which Meshullam b. Zaccur b. Atar,
Aramaean of Syene, gave me for its price, and wrote a document for me
about it, 4 and I give it to Miphtahiah my daughter in return for the
goods which she gave me when I was inspector (?) in the fortress.
I acknowledged (?) 5 them but did not find money and goods to pay you.
Consequently I give you this house 6 in return for those your goods
of the value of 5 kerashin, and I give you the original document which
7 the said Meshullam wrote for me about it. This house I give to you
and I resign all claim to it. It belongs to you and to your children
8 after you and to whomsoever you please you may give it. I have no
power, I or my children or my descendants or any 9 other man, to bring
against you suit or process in the matter of this house which I give you,
and have written the document for you 10 about it. Whoever raises
against you suit or process, (whether it be) I or a brother or sister,
relative or stranger, soldier or citizen, n shall pay you the sum of
10 kerashin, and the house is assuredly yours. Moreover no other man
shall produce against you a document 12 new or old, other than this
document which I have written and given to you : whoever produces
against you such document, I have not "written it. Vi Moreover note,
these are the boundaries of this house. At the upper end of it is the
house of Yeoj^ b. /Vnuliah, at the lower end of it is u the temple of
the God Ya'u, at the east of it is the house of Gadol b. Oshea' and the
street between them, 15on the west of it is the /and of . . . . b. Palto,
priest of the gods Khmtm and Sali (?). This house 16 1 give you and
resign all claim to it. It is yours for ever. To whomsoever you wish,
give it. n Nathan b. Ananiah wrote this document at the direction of
Mahseiah and the witnesses hereto. Mahseiah signed for 18 himself (?).
Mithrasari (?) b. Mithrasari (?), and Satibarzanes'%. Atharli, silversmith. PS
13 Witness, Barbari b. Dargi, silversmith of the place (?). Witness, ....
b. Shemaiah. 20 ZaccurJ b. Shallum. (Endorsement.) 21 Document
concerning Mahseiah b. Yjedoniah aud Miphtahiah his daughter.
Line 1. /// a is probable. According to Gutesmann it should be
Chisleu 2 = Mesore 10, or Chisleu 3 = Mesore 11. Hontheim reads 2.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 13 39
Line 2. In nos. 8, 9 Mahseiah is a Jew of Yeb, of the degel of
Haumadata. NrV3^>. The b marks the accusative, as occasionally in
these texts. The house was at Elephantine, since it adjoins the temple
(1. 14), though the owner and former owner are both 'of Syene '.
Line 3. Meshullam is a party to no. 10. abv adverbially 'con-
cerning (it)', cf. 133. IDS as Ezra 210.
Line 4. nan has been much discussed, but nothing has yet been
suggested which seems better than the original explanation in S-C.
A word nm or DTJn is fairly common in late Hebrew, and in Arabic
vu-jja) in the sense of 'measuring'. It is clearly not Semitic, and it
seems an impossible coincidence that there should be two loan-words
identical in form, but differing in meaning and origin, even if they are
found 1000 years apart. Other words in these documents occur else-
where not earlier than the Talmud. The common ground is to be found
in the Persian ^b-ljjl. A Persian loan-word is as natural here as in
modern Arabic, where ^s^, is explained as being from the Persian »}Uil
(from ^i-ljol). The precise meaning here, however, is still not clear.
The modern Arabic &-,joa (and so modern Hebrew) means ' geometry '
or ' measurement ' as applied to various arts, such as drawing, engineering,
architecture, astronomy. In the Talmud the verb is used of the marks
on measures of liquid &c. Hence it ought to mean here something like
' inspector of weights and measures ' or ' controller of the water supply '
for drinking or irrigation. In 27? riJH is apparently a verb. Andreas
takes it to mean ' heap', i.e. ' many ' in 27?, but that is unsuitable here.
Clermont-Ganneau doubtfully suggests ' crowd '. Noldeke rejects this
and proposes ' einberufen ' (so Smend) or ' answered . Lagrange, ' charge
des rations '. m"33 either a mistake for Nn"V23, or a name (y ?) has
been omitted. n^SN Lagrange, ' in the fortress of Apalt '. Noldeke
also takes it as a name, and makes 1DH (1. 5) refer back to nnrv n. This
is impossible. It must be a verb governing ion. Bab. apdlu means
' answer ', ' announce '. Can it mean ' I acknowledged them ' ? It might
possibly be rtas4 (' I consumed '), but the tail is hardly straight enough
for 3.
Line 5. Kn the separate pronoun as accusative, cf. X5r'5 &c. "inK,
commonly in Ahikar and Behistun, 'and then '.
Line 6. fjiFn restored from 1. 4, but very uncertain. There seems to be
something (n or >) after the Q, but it is difficult to guess what other word
would suit the passage. '3^D33 (S-C yD3:) is correct and fairly
certain. «3^>N is correct and probable, as in 148. There is a slight
trace of*. [3fl3] a trace of n.
4o ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 13
Line 7. VmnN 'about it', as in 9*. »3^1 as in 11. ir, 16, for
the usual _,T • There is no evident reason for ~H . Both forms must have
been in use, and "H is not necessarily later or popular, since ~V is used
in the Ptolemaic papyrus no. 81, which is not formal.
Line 10. mi a mistake for 3311, as 2"ip for 3*"lp.
Line n. DNa mistake for DSN, as in 615.
Line 12. pQJMS practically certain. This spelling (as against pEW in
1. 11) is due to carelessness rather than error. The usual n is merely
a vowel-letter indicating the pronunciation pE2? as distinguished from p2J\
There was no reason why it should not be omitted from a word which
was always used in the (H)aphel (as rDKTl io9,10), or was evidently
causal since it has an object, as here. DD for nDD, another mistake.
Line 1 3. [v~\W is probable, as there is a slight trace of E>, and the
name occurs several times. S-C 1W which does not occur, though
•"IIKniV is found in i2. The house was near that conveyed to Mibtahiah
in no. 8. See the plan in no. 5.
Line 14. K113S is the temple, cf. no. 30, and notes there. It was not
merely a chapel or shrine, as conjectured by S-C before the discovery of
Sachau's papyri. Other speculations as to its character may now be
disregarded. nfT> for W only here (and in "lisnn>, i2?). The form,
which is certain, has been much discussed, but it is probably a mere slip,
considering the many errors in this document. n^NyiO, in 86 more
fully rb cn? NJJ1D. NpC^l for Npl&'l by a mistake? nma a mistake
for DiTO^ ? There may be something after it, but nothing is wanted.
Line 15. p[~)X]. The p is probable. It seems not to be 1V3.
71 . . , The reading "jiTlD (S-C) is hardly probable. The papyrus is
slightly out of position. "]\-Q is unlikely. We should expect an Egyptian
name ("JTIDX ?) though the father's name is Jewish. )a?Q, cf. late
Hebrew viL^D and O.T. vbs, ^S, &c. VifDI Dl]5n are not quite
certain as the space is barely sufficient even if the papyrus is re-adjusted.
But the reading is probable, because Khnum and Sati were associated as
the divinities of the cataract, there must be two names since NVt?K is
fairly certain (not Nn?x), and "1E3 is correctly used in these texts (cf. 305,
21Jn T NHEO), as later, of the priest of a foreign god. v is probable
(not as S-C). It might be dUrrW or D^n or 31Jn (as in 305).
Line 16. *]^ another mistake for h3a ^n defectively, or a mistake,
for \TQil.
Line 17. The sentence ends with 1J2, unless 'jl 'n» 2D3 is an intrusion.
As it stands, we must translate ' at the direction of M. and the witnesses
hereto'. But the formula is unusual. iT^QJ \D3. It must be a 3,
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 13 41
not "1 (as S-C), cf. the 3 in 3D3 just before. It cannot then be for
[rPJ*l]> "13. The meaning is quite obscure. It looks as if Mahseiah
had become impatient, seized a pen and written something hastily. If so,
he probably meant (as S-C) ' M. wrote for himself, but it is not clear
how the words can mean that.
Line 18. PnDTTlD. The D") are run together, and might be Dn as in
rVDno. Hence S-C monno. It may be the Persian name Mithrasari.
(jPQW]l is restored from 51C. There is perhaps a trace of n. s7"inx
is certain here. The name is no doubt the same as in 5T0, where
see note. ^M. Lagrange suggests ' Caspian ', but if such a gentilic
name were found it would be N*SD3, as N^33 in 619.
Line 19. n3~!3. Unknown as a name. vm, cf. X3T1 518 (for
jEJTl), or it may be W, cf. AaSayos, AaSax^s. NiriN. ' Silversmith
of the place ' is a strange expression, cf. mriN 62, of Dargman. Lagrange,
' Caspien de Athra ' (as in 62), cf. Atropatene. He also compares
Ezra 817, which, however, does not help. The_very slight traces
remaining do not fit any of the known names of sons of Shemaiah.
Line 21. rT'DncQ. The formulais unusual.
No. 14.
Settlement of Claim. 441 B.C.
The date is 441 b. c, probably the year before, and in view of,
Mibtahiah's third (?) marriage (in no. 15).
Hatevy thinks that Mibtahiah had married Pi', an Egyptian, and
adopted his religion. She swears by Sati in 1. 5. Among the witnesses
here there is no one with a Jewish name, because the community refused
to recognize her. On her divorce she would return to the Jewish faith.
This document is the act of separation following on the divorce pro-
nounced by the court, cf. 1. 3. If in:x TBD is right in 1. 4, she must
have been married to him, and Haldvy's explanation must be in the main
correct. They now have to divide their possessions and she is required
to take an oath, the object of which is not clear. It would seem to relate
to the amount of stock in her hands or to their joint credit, she having
carried on the business of ?yi"W with Pi'. He declares himself satisfied
with her statement, and the division of property is completed. The
terms had evidently been settled in the previous suit (1. 3).
The papyrus is in an excellent state of preservation.
4a ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 14
Sayce and Cowley, F.
B>DB>nmn // /// 1 nap aans^ /// /// /// ~> av in mb \lll-> 3 1
jmv nn rrDno ma iTntaao^ wrva pai? bmi 'na na 2
sjD3 by maa paa pay *r wn ^y nmi ban!' jid n n"o-in 3
j, ytx y.-rtuiG. nwoio pis* Ham prjpi ja3a i>3 ^>nai prui na^i -nam 4
** — " *aa^ a*ui rmri?$ tid3 an^y h vnnan "o^y nxtao 5
}» »aa» npmi ~^k Nsaaa i?y ^ *may n sai nxDitaa 6
-mi ton ami p wyw i>naK «b a^>y nyi nar mdp 7
'anna pi arr^y <fy »nwD» n »a1?M traaa ova ^ mai 8
■•am tro nax •on hnoio bb>3 ^xnai ^ia *anai aaii p 9
aan xh p «h sata >aaK3 // /// jtjna spa n'nta»$> jnas* 10
nar NiaD fnaiaa na »BKtaa ana aam jnba p pm nasi 11
;naiaa na '•jniaa iaa vmrw na na s^a aaa xni^a paa 12
jnw na *jniaa son ia inaiTy »aao na ni^ 13
Endorsement. [n^njoao^ toa ana n pm» iaa 14
1 On the 14th of Ab, that is the 19th day of Pahons, year 25 of
Artaxerxes the king, said Pi' 2 b. Pahi, builder, of Syene the fortress,
to Mibtahiah daughter of Mahseiah b. Yedoniah 3 Aramaean of Syene,
of the detachment of Warizath (as follows) : In accordance with the
action which we took at Syene, let us make a division concerning the
money 4 and corn and garments and bronze and iron, all goods and
possessions, and the marriage-document. Then an oath 5 was imposed
on you and you swore to me concerning them by the goddess Sati and
my heart was content 6 with that oath which you took to me concerning
those your goods and I renounce all claim on you from 7 this day for
ever. I have no power to institute against you suit or process, you or
son 8 or daughter of yours in the matter of those your goods concerning
which you have sworn to me. If I institute against you 9 suit or process,
or my son or daughter sue you in the matter of that your oath, I, Pi', or
my son 10 will pay to Mibtahiah the sum of 5 kerashin, royal weight,
without suit or process, u and I renounce all suit and process. Petisi
^ b. Nabunathan wrote this document 12 in Syene the fortress, at the
direction of Pi' b. Pahi. Witnesses hereto : Nabure'i b. Nabunathan.
13 Luhi b. Mannuki. 'Odnahar b. Duma. Nabure'i b. Vashtan. (En-
dorsement.) u Deed of quittance which Pi' wrote for Mibtc? hiah.
Line 1. TIB "13 N^a. Probably Egyptian, but the meaning of the
names is obscure. Note that he does not belong to a degel.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 14 43
Line 2. 7DH1N. Bab. arad-ekalli, 'servant of the palace'. In later
Aramaic it means 'architect' or 'builder'. In 152 Ashor is I bi'mK
JJ8370 . Haldvy compares Persian ardikar, ' wall-maker '. fcpJT for 7PXV •
Line 3. ?y ' in accordance with ' ? We should expect -yoab before it.
p2y not p2y as S-C, but the phrase is strange. The last letter
is really a f|, or } with the top broken. by after mS3 is also strange,
but the meaning of mD3 is certain. Noldeke says ' let us separate ',
and supplies "TDK? before it. Halevy compares J6 'I withdrew' (un-
suitable).
Line 4. 1D3N "I3D (not |n3N as S-C), a 'deed of marriage', cf. 153.
He gave up the deed on his divorce, showing that he had no longer
any rights over her. She re -married in the next year.
Line 5. flNUD 'came upon you', i.e. was imposed upon you. *DD2.
There is no question of the reading or meaning. She was required
to swear by the Egyptian goddess because her opponent was an Egyptian.
(I. Levi compares B. T. Sanhedrin 63b, tilvb TiDK ^NICCH FP3M "ION*
fee? n"jn yyc:) njnat^ \b n^nn^ NrrK* 2"y Dy niBniB* rbyw. Samuel
belonged to the third century a. d.). The case is different from that
in which other divinities are mentioned in connexion with Ya'u and the
temple. This concerns a definitely foreign deity (cf. the ' queen of
heaven' in Jer. 44), not one who had been accepted or imagined as
Jewish. x"^4^ C^'fT^^1
Line 6. S'Dt/ Note 1 again sporadically for T. It is perhaps a
mistake for »31 as in 1. 9, elsewhere "nt, which would be correct in
speaking to a woman. >y?bt would be correct, as in 1. 8. There is
room for \ and possibly some trace of it.
Line 9. ^1J1 perfect, as '■•jrfHJ (1. 8), depending on fit. There is a
mark above the \ whichTseems to be unintentional. "9N*i*21, cf. N'3T,
1. 2. Here the X is for n of the feminine. »J31 added parenthetically
without affecting the construction.
Line 10. iTnBID? a mere mistake.
Line 11. '21 *DNUD, a man bearing a pure Egyptian name whose
father has a Babylonian name.
Lines 12, 13. The witnesses' names are in their own writing.
Line 13. ^330, shortened from Bab. Mannuakiilani ■=. 7M*D. "injiTy
'21 can hardly be read otherwise, but the names are unknown. ^1123
is Babylonian, while his father's name is Persian.
Line 14. pmo 'withdrawal' or renunciation of claim. It was not the
actual divorce, but the sequel to it.
ok
Sayce and Cowley, G. '
x) o c^t-***jL,tf3X, ,
B>[pB>nniN . . . rw\ pjsn mh III III [w in] *it?n[b // ///] ^a 1
[N>bo
bib pd *? *oi[n mD]rtD^ tb^ts n bains [«nv] in iiiidn ion 2
wjnS> .toso inia[b] »b |n:ob in*n rni[«] n:N ion^ ntm 3
mo i? nan* oby ijn rut nov jo r6ya raaa wi:n »n 4
naab sen yby by [Njabo ^3Na II III f?p& [ejca] rmoso ima 5
II fbpt? r . ,
»J3N3 ) tj»ia niian [*i]m m»a rpnoao [inijab nby:n ua 6
aon mn loy 1 ) K>ab rrra nb nbyarl -'bill ppa'.Nabo 7
11 111 in ;
p\>v ll;ftt'ia spa;m[>] II III a II III III jon tin mn pi) yav 8
i
^ a «»»& JM*£**^
tAr*
44
No. 15.
Marriage Contract. About 441 B.C.
The number of the year is lost, line i being much broken. There are,
however, reasons for putting the document at about the same date as
no. 14, or soon after. The scribe Nathan was a witness to nos. 8 and 9
in 459 b.c. and wrote no. 10 in 456 and no. 13 in 447. In 459
Mibtahiah was the wife of Yezaniah, her first marriage. In no. 13 (447)
he is not mentioned, and was therefore probably dead or divorced. In
no. 20 (420) Ashor, the present bridegroom, was apparently also dead,
leaving two sons old enough to act as principals in an action at law.
Supposing them to be then about 18 years of age, the present marriage
cannot have taken place much after 440. If the interpretation of no. 14
is right and Mibtahiah was then (in 441) just divorced from her second
husband, we are forced to date this document in or after 441. At any
rate Ashor is not mentioned in no. 1 4. [Gutesmann calculates the date
as 447-449.]
One of the witnesses here is Penuliah b. Yezaniah, and in no. 20 (420)
a witness is Yezaniah b. Penuliah, probably his son, as a child was often
named after his grandfather.
This is a naina or marriage settlement (cf. demotic marriage contracts
in Journal Asiatique 1906, p. 351), giving lists of the mutual gifts with
their values, very important for determining the relative" values of the
money terms. See Introduction, p. xxii. It then states the terms of
succession in case the marriage is dissolved. Cf. no. 9. Unfortunately
the text is very difficult, partly owing to its broken condition, and partly
to the many unknown words.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 15 '. 45
7W |1 III 3 ll III III px ins* nm mn I b^ n^o kJ3«3 9
run oneo iray n pn« cab N3^» 'aata II III III ?W ^oa 10
nit? trm *r ) *m» I III III \bpv spa mc\lll a III III f»N *pa ei
II pro ** pa II 1 I i>ptf **,Da nMB> cm *r I [*n]»n II 1 I ^pt? spa 12
XBD3 ^3 II 1 spa HW ^™ *> I V^T [l]l {??& ep3 piP 13
*:3N3 ->i> II -1 «p3 "^;-6n II lll^pc III III j'sna **,D3 n*d3*. *cm 14
jvnyj na nbj n 1 w ua ^aab n^m] <6y ^>y t-ata 15./
4 }nco"pb> II III III n Dpn
mn }irn ,% 1 pajp II |aa p?d *? I pa \lll px »i 16
ltw< n^ rapai ia*i i3i iinDN rii6* f[in]« di* ltTiriia" 17
nrv33 ntS?j*> *n n'naao nnnax n*[nBa]ra jo nj*_jn*N 18
xyix *s:x bv nb *n\x n bi wapi [»m]D33i iinDx s? 19
*6 napil i3i i3i rvnuso niran di* ik inn n5»a 20
n'Daaa nam'' in ihdx n^y3 linos |*a n^> VfH 21
hrrja n*n&ia»] Dipn jinx di[* ix] mra nj*jpi 22
bv 3nn ncxi3 ntus** eps ^y3 unDxi* nxx> iraxii 23
nbyan n hi |l i \Tll III ji>pB* *pa nn[Dx]^ bjxjrp mho 24
xh n'as n [Kn[i*] *inm Din ny on p psjnn mka 25
nnya ihdx Dip' pro* di* it* inn 331 xh pi* 26
n^yjn 1 5>ai ias[»] nine n*ntaa» *nn[>N!"] inj^ idni 27
inni nnn spa nn ova mn ny Dn |b pann nra 28
n*nt2sra i>y Dip* [p]i 331 xh p xi? g n*a* *t jx n? 29
n^ pj* n:sjpi Mioaai imbx *r nn*3 p 111311!* 30
irax hx vh) ut nisd pi n5 [*n]yi "^^la *iD3 31
*r pa pb piiN pai n*D*:ra }ni* nins* nn3N *!* *n*s' 32
|n^ pns* nnani [p]a *!* sn*x idn* jn n'nraao *^ i^n 33
*j3s*3 "^ fins [e|]D3 irniaaD? frws? n*33i n'noao 34
i5n myn jm n*[nt:]DD p *3*3pi *D33 in[3iN] bm vb) N3^ra 35
[Na]^D *J3N*3 -5 iB*ia [ejoa] n*nraaDi* pax 0[inx ib]d i*ap) ud 36
123 mrwh [unDK dq3 nit mibd] n*33y ia pj 313 37
ii3[r] 13 omra nnix 13 n*[. . .] nw 13 n^ua 3S
. , ; . i]5 b*yi inp 39
1 On the 25th (?) of Tishri that is the 6th day of the month Epiphi,
year . . . of Artaxerxt% the king, 2 said Ashor b. Z*vfo, builder to the king,
to Mahseiah Aramaean of Syene, of the detachment of 3 Warizath, as
46 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 15
follows : I came to your house that you might give me your daughter
Miphtahiah in marriage. 4 She is my wife and I her husband from
this day for ever. I have given you as the price 5 of your daughter
Miphtahiah the sum of 5 shekels, royal weight. It has been received by
you and your heart is content c therewith. I have delivered to your
daughter Miphtahiah into her hand for the cos/ of furniture 1 karash
2 shekels royal 7 weight, of the standard of 2 r to 10. I have delivered
to her into her hand 1 woollen robe, new, striped, 8 dyed on both sides,
(whose) length was 8 cubits by 5, worth the sum of 2 kerashin 8 shekels,
9 royal weight ; 1 closely-woven (shawl) new, (whose) length was 8 cubits
by 5, worth 10 the sum of 8 shekels royal weight ; another woollen robe,
finely woven, (whose) length was n 6 cubits by 4, worth the sum of
7 shekels; 1 mirror of bronze, worth 12 the sum of 1 shekel 2 r ; 1 tray
of bronze, worth the sum of 1 shekel 2 r ; 2 cups of bronze, 13 worth the
sum of 2 shekels ; 1 bowl of bronze, worth the sum of 2 r ; total money
14 and value of goods being the sum of 6 kerashin 5 shekels 20 hallurin,
of the standard of 2 r to 10, royal weight. 15 1 have received, and my
heart is content therewith, 1 couch of reeds with 4 supports (?) 1G of
stone ; 1 pk of slk ; 2 ladles, holding (?) 8 h ; 1 ms'n knife (?) ; 1 cosmetic
box of ivory, new. 17 To-morrow or another day (if) Ashor should die
and there is no child male or female 18 belonging to him by Miphtahiah
his wife, Miphtahiah has a right to the house 19 of Ashor, his goods and
his chattels and all that he has on the face of the earth, 20 all of it.
To-morrow or (another) day (if) Miphtahiah should die and there is no
child male or female 21 belonging to her by Ashor her husband, Ashor
shall inherit her goods 22 and her chattels. To-morrow or another day
(if) Miphtahiah should stand up in the congregation 23 and say, I divorce
Ashor my husband, the price of divorce (shall be) on her head ; she shall
return to 24 the scales and weigh out to Ashor the sum of 7 shekels
2 r and all that I have put 25 into her hand she shall give up, both
shred (?) and thread, and she shall go away whither she will, without
26 suit or process. To-morrow or another day (if) Ashor should stand
up in the congregation 27 and say, I divorce my wife Miphtahiah, her
price shall be forfeited, but all that I have put 28 into her hand, she shall
give up, both shred (?) and thread, on one day at one time, and she
shall go 29 away whither she will, without suit or process. But if he
should rise up against Miphtahiah 30 to drive her out from his, Ashor's,
house and his goods and chattels, he shall give her 31 the sum of
20 kerashin, and the provisions of this deed shall be annulled, as far
as she is concerned. And I shall have no right to say 32 I have another
wife besides Miphtahiah and other children than the children whom
33 Miphtahiah shall bear to me. If I say I have children and wife other
than 34 Miphtahiah and her children, I will pay to Miphtahiah the su?/z of
20 kerashin, royal weight, 35 and I shall have no right to take away
my goods and chattels from Miphtahiah ; and if I remove them 36 from
her [erasure] I will pay to Miphtahiah the sum of 20 kerashin, royal
weight. 37 Nathan b. Ananiah wrote this deed at the direction of Ashor
and the witnesses hereto : 38 Penuliah b. Jezaniah. . . . iah b. Uriah (?).
Menahem b. Zaccxxr. 39 Witness, Re'ibel (?) b. . . .
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 15 47
Line 1 can now be restored with some certainty, except the number of
the year. [/////J "3 3. The lower part of "3 is visible and is fairly
certain. It might be "», less probably. There is then room for about
five units. HUTl . There is enough remaining of the lower parts of
letters to make this certain now that the rest is explained. S-C marked
it as doubtful because the facsimile shows traces of letters after it which
were read K7E> *?, and it was thought that this was part of some new
formula. The remnants, however, are certainly to be read ^DC'nmx]
[n]370, and the loose fragment on which they are written should be
transferred to the end of the line. fiJfc?. There are again traces which
fit this, and room for about // /// ~% after it.
Line 2. "iinDN seems to have afterwards taken the name of Nathan,
but whether as a proselyte or not, does not appear. Cf. 25s, 282 with
203. This name and his father's are pure Egyptian. 'JD '•T 73T1K, see
on 142. He was a government contractor like Pi' b. Pahi.
Line 3. The constructions are curious, though the sense is clear.
rvnK with an accusative, "b |D3t37 'to (ask you to) give me'. *jm37
accusative as in 132, with another 7 marking the dative. fVUBO a mere
mistake, cf. 1410. 1I"UN7 ' for wife-hood ', i. e. in marriage. Not as S-C.
Line 4. 1TO the ' dowry ' is properly the price paid for a wife
(cf. Gen. 3412 and often), here 5 shekels, no doubt the legal sum required
to make the marriage valid. It was paid to the father, showing that he
still had at least a legal palria potestas, although Mibtahiah had been
already married at least once (probably twice), must have been well over
30 years of age, and was able to conduct business in her own right.
Anything given over and above the legal price was a present to the
bride.
Line 5. T»7X7 ?X? ' it has come (77X7) to you ', i. e. you have accepted the
payment. 301 usually TU, as in 1. 15.
Line 6. nbyin . Unfortunately there is no distinction in writing between
the 1st and the 2nd persons. Freund and Jampel take it as the
2nd person, the father's present to the bride, not the bridegroom's gift.
But the sum total in 1. 14 shows that the presents were given by the same
person who paid the 5 shekels, i. e. Ashor. rwan properly ' arrange-
ment' or outfit, i.e. perhaps, to furnish the house. Cf. Nah. 210.
I) pp& above the line, as often in this deed.
Line 7. 3un. In Prov. 716 ni3Bn is translated by RV as 'striped
cloths ' (of the yarn of Egypt). In Talmud paoin are garments with
a pattern or embroidered. Perhaps ' striped ' is most likely here, but the
meaning is uncertain.
48 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 15
Line 8. )">T dual of T , Bab. idu, ' on both sides '. m[tr] ' equal to ',
i. e. worth. It was a costly garment.
Line 9. WXV. A weaver's rod is tt3K>, whence the verb means to keep
the rod closely pressed against the work, so that this should be ' closely-
woven ' stuff. It must have been specialized as a trade-term, and from its
size can only have been some kind of shawl, as also CO? above. This
was a cheaper article. if III III is probable here, as in 1. 8, a stock
size. The last unit is a long way from the rest, and one unit seems to
be covered by a crease in the papyrus.
Line 10. BI"ltW. Cf. Jer. 9s, Dints' (Kere for nnic) explained by the
Jewish commentators as = "J^DJ ' drawn out ' (Kimhi ' affile* '), and
2 Chron. 915 D1HC 1T\\ 'gold drawn out', i.e. beaten thin. Similarly in
Talmud. Lagrange suggests ' avec franges '. The form is Niphal,
therefore not Aramaic, but probably a trade-term derived from the
language of Phoenician merchants (so Lidzbarski).
Line 12. [Tljon, though it was difficult to guess, is not really doubtful.
There are slight traces of T1. The papyrus is crushed here. It is no
doubt a variant of Talm. iinon. There is no room for 1. II "l. The
n is badly made, like a 3. II . . , }D3 or possibly III, but as the price
is 2 shekels, it was probably 1 shekel per cup. The prices are arranged
in a descending scale.
Line 14. bpW a mistake for J^pti>. ~% \"hr\. There is a faint stroke
after "3 which might be a unit, but it is no doubt unintentional, as 21 h.
would not fit the sum on any reckoning. On the conclusions to be
drawn from the sum of the items, see Introduction, p. xxii. In order
to make up the total we must include the 5 shekels paid by Ashor to
Mahseiah. But the total must represent the whole of the payments in
money (5 shekels) and goods (^03!) '•Oil N3D3 b'S) made by one and the
same person. Hence in 11. 6, 7 J"6y:n must be 1st person 'I (Ashor)
gave '.
Line 15. The deed was drawn up in Ashor's name. He therefore
states the value of his own gifts, to make the most of them. He does not
think it necessary to state the value of what he receives. |¥3JJ3 is quite
unknown. Apparently a Niphal form, and so not Aramaic. If W is a
'bed' (cf. Arukh s.v. *W i), the four JV3JJJ are very likely 4 feet.
Line 16. pa. Meaning unknown. The root ppa means either to
'split' or to 'stop up'. A 'hatchet'? Epstein suggests that it is for
p3 = Npin or Persian isb. ' pitcher ', cf. Heb. "ja . He might compare
p3p3, 'a flask'. pbo must be a noun describing the material, not as
S-C. There is a slightly larger space than usual after it, which seems to
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 15 49
indicate separation from what follows. But its meaning as a noun is
unknown. jaa probably ' ladles ' or ' bowls ', not ' handles ' as S-C.
pn, cf. jvin 206 where it is associated with wood. I have translated it by
'ivory', cf. cra». Noldeke rejects this, and proposes 'palm-leaves',
taking D312 as a ' tray ' or ' basket '. opn, &c, above the line, being
singular, must refer to D313 (feminine ?) and mean ' containing '. Then
n is not for p^n, since this series is not valued, nor a cipher for 8 (as
Doller, Staerk) since letters are never so used in these texts, but must be
a measure, as in 24s8. |«b>o pp, meaning quite unknown. The
translation of pB> (root, ' to be sharp ') as ' knife ', is a mere guess of no
value.
Line 20. Dr. pnx has been accidentally omitted.
Line 22. mya, Hebrew. Borrowed as a technical term.
Line 23. ntUP, as in 9s. fflSWU, 'is on her head ', i. e. apparently
' she is responsible ' for it. ann from nin, she shall return to the scales,
or Haphel, she shall put back in its entirety. Not from 3m, as Noldeke,
' sie setzt sich ', and Jampel who compares Lev. $2i and translates ' sie
soil als Hauptsumme das Scheidungsgeld auf die Wage legen '.
Line 24. \Tll III is more probable than \|| III because of the space.
1 1 1 not for -> b 1 1 "1 . as Staerk. Since || T = -| a shekel she had to pay back
the original ino with 50 per cent, added. ni>y:n and pfijnn (1. 25) are
opposed. Freund and Jampel take r6y:n here and in 1. 27 as 3rd person
' what she has received '. But it must refer to the same person as in 1. 7,
' what I delivered to her she shall give up '.
Line 25. on is certain from 1. 28, but the precise meaning is unknown.
Cf. Gen. i42!. Lidzbarski suggests 'radish ' as something of small value.
One would expect the meaning to be akin to that of ttin. The phrase
means ' to the last shred '. |Ni"i7 probably two words, as in 1. 29.
Line 26. pT is clear. Probably a mere mistake.
Line 27. Tas[*]. If he divorced her, he forfeited the five shekels paid
for her, but got back the presents. n^yjn is difficult. The writer
seems to be confused about the persons. He is writing in Ashor's
name, but speaks of him in the 3rd person in 1. 26. Here he seems
to revert to the 1st person, as above. Or can this be 3rd fern.,
• she put (i. e. received) into her hand ' ?
Line 28. '31 "in DV3, a legal formula for 'all together'.
Line 29. rb is a sort of reflexive with yin, cf. v *].?. to \6 seems
the only possible reading — for n?2 = the usual N71.
Line 30. nniDin^. This is a third case. She might divorce him,
or he might divorce her in legal form, or he might eject her forcibly and
I8»9 e
50 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 15
illegally, in which case he would have to pay a heavy fine. Epstein
thinks that *pn = BH3, the later term for divorce by a BJ, but it surely
implies an aggravation of what precedes. 'tf V i"lJV3 JD perhaps not
merely a case of the anticipatory pronoun, but 'k V is added because
nn^ might be his or her house, to make it quite clear.
Line 31. [H]jP1 is better than [l»]y»1 (as S-C) which is not found in
these texts. JH must mean the legal obligation or provisions of the deed.
As she is evidently regarded in this case as wrongly treated, it is reason-
able to suppose that she would be freed from any further obligations.
^3K. He reverts to the 1st person, though he has just used the 3rd
(jnr) in 1. 30.
Line 32. Cf. Greek Pap. Tebtunis i, no. 104, 1. 18: koX /xri c£«rra>
4>iAtcrKa) yvvatKa aWrjv lirayayiadaL dAAa &TroWu)via.v . . . fxrj^k t(kvo-
7roL€ia6aL e£ a\\r)<; -ywai/cos . . . eav Se Tt tovtwv iiri8€i)(6r) 7roiaiv . . .
CLTTOTicraTU) . . . rrjv (jiepvrjv.
Line 33. pnx, probably a mistake for p~inN (so Noldeke). We
might read nn:N1 [l]3, or pnN maybe plural of nnx as mnx (1. 32)
is its feminine (so Noldeke) instead of i"U"inK.
Line 35. "in[jriN] is not very certain. It does not seem quite the
suitable word, but an equivalent of myn is wanted, and nothing else
suggests itself. T5n. It may perhaps be Dnmyn, but the D is made
as in N3^0 just below, and the following stroke should be 1.
Line 36. f[inN *1D]D bl\> 'in accordance with any other deed', is
erased, and has therefore been omitted in the translation.
Line 37. The scribe is the same as in nos. 10 and 13.
Line 38. rpijUQ. Lagrange thinks this is the son of her former
husband, who was probably dead. The next pair of names is very
uncertain. S-C read Yezaniah b. Uriah, and Lagrange thinks this may
be her former husband, which is very unlikely. Possibly iTJT or iTDno
for the first name.
Line 39. 5 ^yi very uncertain. For the form cf. M*\jn and ^1133.
The endorsement is lost. One would like to know what they called the
document (1DJN nSD ?).
No. 16.
An Appeal to a Higher Court. About 435 b.c.
The papyrus is so much broken that very little can be made out of it.
The mention of year 31 requires a date in the reign of Artaxerxes I
since of the only three kings who reigned so long, Darius I is too earl)
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. j6 51
and Artaxerxes II is too late. A Nephayan (if that is the pronunciation)
was N/Tm in 411 (see 307), but his father Waidrang was N^n3"l in 416
(see 2 52) and was promoted to fratarak before 411. Nephayan here
must therefore be a different person from Nephayan in no. 30 : perhaps
his grandfather. The 31st year of Artaxerxes I was 435 b. c. and the
deed must have been drawn up then or soon after. It seems to be an
appeal from the decision of a lower court to a higher authority, but all
the details are obscure.
Sachau, plate 7. Ungnad, no. 7.
.... w»] -a |is[aa bvi] Q . . S b$ 1
IwnmK] \ ->"? na[e> iy] \///"3 r\w }o rh jonno }b[n] nbp[n nat 2
.... s]5n nip moKi N3*n[i m]nn D[np] ni>w [ejx 3
.... K]*jn i^k nnpi> [>!?] jhjd S[3ix]T ffn ni>[pn 4
.... w]m nnn Dip mosi T3y ptrjni ... 5
. . . ph pri> i^y pB3i |-em \->"3 rotJ> ny \///"^ rot? j[o . . 6
. . , . b y& «nn» tfm po *T x^n 3-1 paa n jrsm . . 7
.... ro]j>3i ^ *v3y pcrya ibn^ nr6t>> »n*i» Dip n5[x 8
, . . . T ^ layiv ^n pirya rai [^Jy wm nnr6 bxv 9
1 to Ar^ames (?) a«</ /<? iJ/^aphernes b. WSHI ....
2//«>/eld our detachment owned from the 24th year to the 31st year of
Artaxerxes . . . ;J also I was examined befoxt TR WH arid the court, and
I stated before the court .... 4 the /fcld I ploughed but the produce I did
not receive from them. These judges . . . . 5 . . . and a wrong was done
to me, and I stated before TRWH and the court . . . . 6 . . . from the
year 24 to the year 31, and Megaphernes and Nephayan and Mannuki,
the 3 judges, went up to Syene and took with them (?).... 7 .. . the
assessors (?) of Nephayan, commander of the garrison of Syene, and the
judges of the province, how .... 8 I (?) before my lord have sent saying,
1 A wrong was done to me,' and nozo . . . . 9 ask TRWH and the court
abott/ this, (and) let wrong not be done to me, and ....
Line 1. Some lines necessary to explain the case are lost at the
beginning. D . , S, perhaps DKHK. pa is clear. As it must be
a name (since "13 follows), and as pDJ3 occurs in 1. 6, the restoration
is probable. [v\W\] restored from 2 2133, dated 419. The beginning
was perhaps to this effect: '1 brought an action before the ordinary
court about a field to which I laid claim. Having failed to obtain justice,
I now appeal to the highest authorities, to Arsames(?) and Megaphernes.'
e 2
52 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 16
Line 2. K?p is certain. As |Dnn» is used elsewhere of holding property
in land, S'^pn is a probable restoration. k[^] is only a conjecture,
but it fits the space. If it is right, it is interesting as showing that the
bil could hold property as a corporation. \ ~>"^ as in 1. 6.
Line 3. n^Nt? is no doubt a passive form. In later Aramaic 7KnCK
means to ' undergo examination ' before a court, and hence to ' bring an
action'. The meaning seems to be the same here. Cf. N^Nfc?, 76.
I m]*in as 1. 5. Either a title or (more probably) a name — but it is not
found elsewhere.
Line 4. )V*n, not DK". If the dispute is about a field, it may mean
'plough', and the word before be X^pn. n[3JN]T, a word for
' produce ' is required. fHJO is the only possible reading. ' From
them' (fern.) i.e. the other party. They must have been women.
[N^]. There is a slight trace of b. T\Uvh. The last letter is a badly I
made n. ~\bn is certain. Ungnad's nvN is impossible. [kJ'JH
might be WT, but "pN requires the plural.
Line 5. p£'y31. The proper meaning of pry is 'unfairness' in with-
holding from a person his due. It therefore suits the restoration proposed
in 1. 4. The word occurs in 11. 8, 9 also. The 3 is difficult. It
might be for »a (cf. Phoenician I for ^)y ' and that a wrong was done '.
But Seidel is probably right in taking it as otiose, cf. N/ftj?3; 402, JDro,
^5.8.9i jt would then be originally a modifying particle (like que non for
je crois que non) which afterwards lost its force. No doubt a popular
idiom.
Line 6. N[y*1 J]ll very doubtful. The first stroke is too long, and
there is hardly room for "JH. , . p?1, perhaps [DHDy in]p7i.
Line 7. N'om from m (OP data), 'lawyers', 'assessors'? There is
a slight trace of something before it — a or 2 or D. T^- It is difficult
to see what the construction can be.
Line 8. h5[n] or PUt or X\Y\ (cf. 1. 9). »iO» is the high official
addressed. Elsewhere it generally means Arsames. [nj]y31 or jyDl
or nysi.
Line 9. . , . T. Perhaps ' and to my companions ' (in the degel).
This is the end of the text.
No. 17.
Relating to Siipp lies for the Garrison {?). 428 B.C.
A strip of papyrus written on both sides. Lines 1-4 are on the recto,
5-7 on the verso. It is so much injured that parts of the facsimile are
illegible, and I have accordingly adopted in most cases the reading ol
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 17 53
Sachau and Ungnad, who had the original before them. The date is
certain. The king is Artaxerxes I (since II would be too late), and lr.s
37th year is 428 b. c.
It is a letter addressed to a high official (no doubt Arsames) and
perhaps relates to the accounts for the collection and distribution of corn
(as rations) cf. no. 24.
Sachau, plate 5. Ungnad, no. 5.
jkid D7c Kruno nam nnuai paa nnuai mtintu ynv D[enN i
&NB»] Kn!?N
nns Kronen roam n d^ khjo ^>a i>y noiw £ nyai py b[a sn^ 2
....an
. . . . nya f? an' ana touwa ^k >^y jnta wi n*va Fir ;t |T ansa ... 3
.... rwaT 4
-nuai swbnK Th^y] DtnK jk-i» 5
.... a NnaniN
Kn]an» nap_ nnuai pin y=i5a n 6
Nn^in £j
rue> fmrreb I II III III -> a Dnn:a N-ianrx cay^D rn^y ... 7
[tyjo^nms I III III -> -5
onni^
1 7b o«r lord Arsames, your servants Achaemenes (?) and his colleagues,
Bigdan (?) and his colleagues, and the notaries of the province ; the
welfare of our lord may the gods seek 2 abundantly at all times. And now
you have paid us for all the contribution assuredly which we gave in the
province at (?) the place which is . . . 3 . . . plainly set forth, each item
month by month they were sending to me. Also a written document
was given to us. Now . . . 4 and we will . . .
our lord Arsames your servants Achaemenes (?) and
his colleagues the recorders in .... 6 which we pay.
Haruz and his colleagues the notaries of the province, all 3 villains (?),
... the servant (?) of SYN'BS the recorder, their colleague, on the 19th
of Marheshwan in the 37th year of Artaxerxw, to them.
Line 1. Probably the words |K")D ?K stood above this, cf. 21'.
D[ttns] is likely. It occurs in 1. 5 (Ungnad, doubtfully). E-'JcnK here
and in 1. 5 is very uncertain. nrroa as in Ezra 56 (RV 'companions'),
and frequently in these texts. pJa very uncertain. There is a stroke
which would fit a i, but Ungnad does not print it. Cf. jroa, Esther 221.
Compounded with OP baga, 'god'? 'ai "6kE" the regular formula in
letters, but sometimes in the singular. ' May (the) god(s) inquire after
54 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 17
) our health ', i. e. be careful of it, on the analogy of the ordinary greeting
of one man to another ("]07C HD).
Line 2. ND3D bl by ' for every piece ' ? or perhaps = Heb. bs nJO b]}
' in every respect '. ro5lT is Sachau's reading. *| "iriN ' the place
in which ', i. e. ' where ' ?
Line 3. cnDB, cf. Ezra 418 &c. ' Exactly ' ? as Sachau, or ' separately '.
Jt JT 'thing by thing', i.e. each several thing. NJinPJ, Ezra 418 &c,
cf. Pers. {j^>J>.
Line 4. nntwT (my reading) not tUUWW apparently.
Line 5. NnairN. A Persian compound of N"JTK 'information', and
kar, 'making'.
Line 6. jnaa f (my reading). The ~\ is more like D. It cannot
govern pin. NTli? III ^5 (my reading), is very doubtful. Added as an
afterthought below the line. Cf. 307. pnn = UVin is Egyptian, which
may account for the abusive epithet.
Line 7. tihy ' servant ' ? or part of a longer word. B>5yJ»D very doubt-
ful. A name is wanted, but a compound of Sin is unlikely (619!) because
of the 1 (Ungnad). JltymiD^ probably so. Ungnad reads \titr\T\rh as
a scribal error. pfiniS> = tsb seems to be the only way of reading it,
but the sense is not clear, and ni? does not occur in these texts. In
Ezra there is VnViD.
No. 18.
End of a Marriage Contract. About 425 b. c.
As to the date there is very little evidence. If Ya'uhan here is the
same person as in no. 10, she was a y&l (unmarried girl?) in 456 B.C.
She now appears to have been married and to have a marriageable
daughter, so that the date of this deed cannot be much earlier than 430 or
425 b. c. The scribe here is the son of the man who wrote nos. 10, 13,
J5 (456-441), and therefore presumably rather later. The document
appears to be part of a marriage contract, like no. 15, with provision for
the case of a divorce (nX3K> in 1. 1), though the precise terms are not clear.
It seems that Ya'uhan (a widow ?) had made over to her daughter Sallua,
on the latter's marriage (with Hoshaiah ?) certain money and effects as
dowry, and Ya'uhan here renounces all right to reclaim them in case of
Sallua's divorce. But other combinations are possible.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 18 55
Sachau, plate 33. Ungnad, no. 36.
ma jnw b[ra]n t6) nvaw p n[w] na ib[e>» 5 . . i . . . 1
, rut nhw 1 ,
rvav fya ds? nan1' jcma N-iEDa p<na *r nsdch n"D23 na nrna npwi 2
mjy na jn: na rmwo ana r6 pons* n^> *n na^n nfa loxn pi Dn h»nn 3
jnai>Nn*a -a jn:onn ine> 133 K*ir»5n fmn[n] nwenn oaa naT kisd 4
jnsw na fn:bsn*a iw n*j[TN] ~n bw ine> n*h* ~ia »jn inp 5
1 Ales/j/Alak b. Z7ri a deed of divorce. And Ya'uhan
daughter of Meshullak shall have no right to say to him 2 and to Sallua
her daughter, As I gave these goods and the money which are set forth
in this deed, as a free gift to you, now I desire 3 to take them away.
If she says so, she is liable, no heed shall be paid to her. Ma'uziah
b. Nathan b. Ananiah wrote 4 this deed at the direction of Hoshaiah and
JPVuhan, and the witnesses hereto : Witness, Heremnathan b. Bethel-
nathan b. Zeho. 5 Witness, Haggai b. Penuliah. Witness, Yeosh b.
Azzriidh. Witness, Bethelnathan b. Jonathan.
Line 1. Ungnad reads the marks at the beginning as numerals.
"£[ is fairly certain. The downward stroke from the b is accidental.
The restoration is from 2 268. In 102 Ya'uhan is daughter of Meshullak,
but how he comes in at this point is not evident. p is certain,
not spa (as Sachau). The tail of the "• is an accidental mark in the
papyrus, and the head of it is broken. It must mean a sentence or
act of divorce. ^nan t6) certain, though only the lower parts of the
letters remain. [l^c] restored from io2. [loan] is restored to
correspond to 1. 3, the usual formula being ' she shall not say . . . if she
says so ... ' [rb] ' to him ' or ' to X ' is wanted since ' and to S '
follows. There does not seem to be room for a name. I take ' him to
be the husband of Sallua.
Line 2. Nl^oh. Other forms of the name are .T^D and HNPD.
nma. If rb is the husband of S, this must be 'her (Ya'uhan's)
daughter'. If it is 'his daughter'' rb must be S's father. fOrTO
as in 433, ' as a free gift ', ' out of the affection which I bear to her '.
D37 , i. e. to S and her hu'sband.
Line 3. nfa. The T is badly formed, and nr (= flKT) does not occur
elsewhere in these texts, but it can hardly be anything else. PiaTI not
the usual formula. ycriB" impersonally. 'It (the claim) shall not
be heard as regards her '.
Line 4. rtyOTI. It is difficult to see how he is concerned, unless
56 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 18
he is the husband of S, and this is their marriage deed. Then he and
Ya'uhan would be the parties to the deed, as in no. 15 Ashor and
Mahseiah negotiate the marriage of Mibtahiah. (But no. 15 is written at
the direction of Ashor only.) Since it is the mother who gives away
her daughter, she must be a widow, otherwise the father would have
done it. If Hoshaiah were the father, there would be no need to say
so much of Ya'uhan the mother. Heremnathan and Bethelnathan
are compounded with the god-names D"in and 7NrV3, just as jroirv with
W in 1. 5. See Introduction, p. x. These names only occur here.
The grandfather has an Egyptian name.
Line 5. .T:[TN] '2 WW as in 128.
No. 19.
List of Names. About 420 b. c.
A Meshullam b. Shemaiah (1. 5) is mentioned in 22119, and a son of
Nathan b. Hodaviah (1. 10) in 22127. Possibly 1. 4 is the same as in
22116. It seems therefore as if the two lists have some connexion.
No. 22 is dated 419 b.c. In 202 there is a Menahem b. Meshullam (as
inl. 7) under date 420 b.c. This list may therefore probably be dated 420 + .
Sachau, plate 23. Ungnad, no. 23.
, 1
, , . S 12 myn 2
[?nn]iK -in ycix 3
... -12 tbw nn fR 4
[nyyvw -12 n[b]B>» 5
tbw "Q n»x?DB> 6
[dJco -q oroo 7
[r\]w 12 "an 8
. . . t?K -12 nas* 9
rrmn "12 jna 10
1 2 Ba'adiah b. A 3 Oshea b. Uriah (?). 4 WKYN
b. Shallum b. . . . 5 Meshullam b. Shemaiah. 6 Shemaiah b. Shallum.
7 Menahem b. Meshullaw. 8 Haggai b. Jezaniah. 9 Agiri b. Ash . . .
10 Nathan b. Hodaviah.
Line 1. Only slight traces remain.
Line 3. [, . ,]ik. Only rvnitf and ytj'ix are possible. The former is
more likely, as father and son rarely bear the same name in these texts.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 19 57
Line 4. p5T very uncertain. It might be JD31, but neither is known to
me as a name. Ungnad and Sachau fDO.
Line 9. HJtt. Ungnad compares Bab. Agin. Sachau compares
Agar. For the father's name Sachau suggests^j^'N . A 3 would be
possible.
No. 20.
Settlement of a Claim. 420 B.C.
The papyrus has a bad break where it was bent at one third of its
breadth, and the latter part is not very easy to read. On the whole,
however, the text is fairly certain.
Menahem and Ananiah, sons of Meshullam (cf. 197), had sued Yedoniah
and Mahseiah (cf. 2 53, 2 82), sons of Ashor and Mibtahiah (cf. no. 15),
concerning certain property which had been deposited (as a pledge or
loan ?) with Ashor by their grandfather, Shelomem, and which had not
been restored. They have now been satisfied (by payment ?) and hereby
resign all further claim on the sons of Ashor.
The date is the 4th year of Darius, who must be Darius II, and the
year is therefore 420 b.c. Mibtahiah was married to Ashor in no. 15,
which was dated, partly on the evidence of this deed, about 440 b.c Her
elder son can hardly have been much under 20 years of age when he
became a party to this action. Ashor had evidently died in the mean-
time, otherwise the action would have been taken against him, not against
his sons. So too Shelomem and Meshullam must have died, otherwise
one or other of them would have brought the action. This corroborates
the date of no. 1 (494 b.c), where Shelomem b. Azariah is a witness. He
must have been a young man then, since he lived to transact business
with Ashor, and the interval of seventy-four years between no. 1 and this
deed is not too long for three generations.
The death of Ashor probably took place just before this action, which
was necessary to settle up his affairs. Similarly the division of slaves in
no. 28 was no doubt consequent on the death of Mibtahiah.
Sayce and Cowley, H.
"ion wiT3 a*a pnx nab» cmim \/// n:v [»j]nb in bbx rrva 1
nans brb mhto aH n pw aoibv na cbwn [ya II] b rraaw on jo 2
piff rvDrno ma rvnoao jo xnv na -nriDN "ja II bz .tdtoi mnb 3
arvm Tims tnxn dip ndj pna Da'i^n n[3n:s] ion!' abn 026 4
py >}tXD ^TBl Cm »3NO \tQ\ "lOp nW N<D33 [Tl]"K TDMJ* N^n 3T 5
*5Sft.«f"»
58 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 20
■1
R|M rmTjj na noita jo np^ D313K -vinox "ioxb pp"fi prw *my pirn 6
Daa^Bn pad r6 a*nn s*h jonn im taper! [jnjpaa n wk ion 7
troaa -j^sa j33^ Dnamn "linos *aa mDnoi war nasi Dn^Nt? in« 8
1:0 nanan jpm ma3jn anao run D^y ny na? n[»v] jo 133 pai> 3^1 9
^y3i anp f?si b*ki pnxi jnaai j>aai nanaa bnaa [«$ nbv iy nai kdv fo 10
\wv ybny xh 33m p monoi nw nas D[aa]v.yv pbny t6 nnp u
nnry "o Doito? ♦» j-insi nuy spai JD33 d[^3] cnb b»ki Da^nto 12
nanaw jm
aa^aa^ jipti QaaiB*T mry "13 Doibty *aai [j^]n wi jnaai paai 13
3371331
mtu'sk per n |oh aa'aab ik 03^ jna* *6y p [p]en» ["|n oabn b*w 14
jo p^rin Das im \ Bna$> //n ejoa N3^o s[33n]3 mt?y j^i3 epa n 15
D33 H3T N-13D JD3 "13 .TriyO 3D3 [33]"1 &6l JH N^l Dn^Jf pBH 16
II ba maajn anao
rimy na amo mana na hna hia na ana[o -j]nB> aoi^B> na atao *aa 1 7
nwN [-13] mar n3 nrnin nnB> 18
Endorsement.
qo^b* 13 anao '•aa [II] ^a maajn anao 3n3 n naa 19
kto n3 mnax s33 II ba monoi n[»3i^] 20
1 In the month of Elul, that is Vaj'm', 4th year of Darius the king
at that time in Yeb the fortress, said 2 Menahem and Ananiah both sotis
o/"Meshullam b. Shelomem, Jews of Yeb the fortress, of the detachment
of Iddinnabu, 3 to Yedoniah and Mahseiah, both sons of Ashor b. Zeho
by Mibtahiah daughter of Mahseiah, Jews 4 of the same detachment, as
follows : We -sued you in the court of NPA before Damandin the
governor (and) Waidrang 5 the commander of the garrison, saying :
There are goods, garments of wool and cotton, vessels of bronze and
iron, vessels of wood G and ivory, corn, &c, and we pleaded saying :
Ashor your father received (these) from Shelomem b. Azariah, and also
7 said, ' They are on deposit '. They were deposited, but he kept posses-
sion and did not return (them) to him, and therefore we sue you. 8 Then
you were examined, and you Yedoniah and Mahseiah, sons of Ashor,
satisfied us concerning these goods, 9 and we were satisfied therewith.
From this day for ever I Menahem and Ananiah, we renounce all claim
on you. 10 From this day for ever we shall have no power, and our sons
and our daughters and our brothers and any man related to us or
a freeman of u the city shall have no power to bring against you,
Yedoniah and Mahseiah, suit or process, nor shall they have the power
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 20 59
to sue your sons 12 or your brothers or any one of yours on account
of goods and money, corn, &c., belonging to Shelomem b. Azariah.
If we 13 or our sons or our daughters or any one of ours, or the sons
of Shelomem b. Azariah, sue you or sue your sons or your daughters
14 or any one of yours, or whoever shall sue about it, he shall pay you or
your sons, or whomsoever they sue, a fine 15 of the sum of ten kerashin,
royal weight, at the rate of 2 r to 1 karash, and he assuredly has no
claim on these goods 1G about which we sued, and no suit or process
(can lie). Ma'uziah b. Nathan wrote this deed at the direction of
Menahem and Ananiah both n sons of Meshullam b. Shelomem. Wit-
ness, Menahem b. Gadol. Gadol b. Berechiah. Menahem b. Azariah.
18 Witness, Hodaviah b. Zaccur b. Oshaiah. (Endorsement.) 19 Deed
which Menahem and Ananiah bo/// sons of Menahem b. Shelomem wrote
20 for Yedonioh. and Mahseiah boih sons of Ashor b. Zeho.
Line 1. The day of the month is not given, which is unusual. The
Egyptian month may be [^]ns or [^aJKa. From the calculations of
Mr. Knobel and Dr. Fotheringham it seems that Payni suits the chronology
best. So also Gutesmann.
Line 2. ['33 II] restored from 1. 3. la^lN is Babylonian.
Line 4. D3T as in g2. The sons of Ashor here belong to the degel of
Iddinnabu, but in no. 28 to that of Warizath (?). In no. 15 Ashor
himself (as an Egyptian ?) is not assigned to any degel. Mibtahiah, one
would suppose, belonged to her father's degel, i. e. either Warizath or
Haumadata. NSi, cf. 74 where it seems to be a place-name. Not ejj
Memphis, see Noldeke, Clermont-Ganneau, Pritsch. Nor can it be
OP napd, even if that could have the meaning of ' family ', as has been
suggested. The N^Tim seems to have held his court (and had his
headquarters) at Syene. The NS3 p was a superior court since the
fratarak presided over it. |H3»n must be a name (so Pritsch, Andreas),
not as S-C. Clermont-Ganneau suggests 'tribunal' or 'judge', &c.
Lagrange thinks the phrase = p Dip |». T"ims as in 305, &c.
From OP fratara = ' prior ', ' superior ', and so ' governor '. It cannot
be dependent on jrm (quasi ' lieutenant ' of W), because that would
imply a lower rank than W, whereas in 305 W has ' become fratarak,
and his son is N^nai (307). Hence fratarak is not followed by T2 or
|1D2. He governed the district or* province, while the N7TQ"i commanded
only the garrison of Syene (including Elephantine). A ) has been
omitted before MTI1. So Pritsch; Lagrange doubtfully.
Line 5. w1. . . WN ' there are goods and we sued ', i. e. concerning
certain goods we sued. Cf. 144, also a builder's stock.
Line 6. J¥im, Noldeke 'palm-leaves'. Jampel compares Ps. 1297,
Neh. 513, and ttfkes it as clothing. Cf. on i5:G. p&nT is on the
60 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 20
broken place, but is fairly certain. np7. The omission of the object
is awkward.
Line 7. The construction is very awkward. »J TPN seems to mean
' they are things which are . . .' The following 3 requires a noun, and
JHpS is most likely. *np5ri is Lidzbarski's suggestion. S-C read 'pen.
If a Hophal is admissible it gives a sense, but the form is not found,
I believe, elsewhere in these texts.
Line 8. Dn^Nt? passive as in i6:!.
Line 9. JpTTl ' we withdraw from you ', i. e. renounce all claims.
"po an oversight for DD3E.
Line 13. After D^nm there is a faint X which has been erased. If
the document were a forgery this would be evidence that it was written
by an Arab who used the dual suffix [£— referring to two persons.
Line 14. Tl as elsewhere for *i pi. Probably subject, not object,
of [pJtSH'1, which I restore as plural, as at the end of the line, in spite of
jro"1 singular. The writer is confused by his own verbiage. H?V
adverbially, cf. 1JQ. Nnj^N or NJV. A Persian term for ' fine', as in
2515, 2810, but the etymology is not clear.
Line 15. DEX, not "inN as S-C. pro too much obscured to read,
but it is the word required. nta is more probable than "|^>K (S-C).
Line 16. The same scribe as in no. 25.
Line 19. The second Dnj» is a mistake for D^D.
No. 21. v<tiJ
Order to keep the {Passover and) Feast of Unleavened
Bread. 419 b. c.
See Barth in OLZ 19 12, 10, and Ed. Meyer in Sitzb. Berl. Akad.
1911, p. 1026.
This is one of the most interesting and important of these texts. See
Introduction, p. xvi.
The date is the 5th year of Darius. This must be Darius II, since
Yedoniah, who is addressed evidently as head of the community, holds
the same position in no. 30 (408 b. a). The year is therefore 419 b .c.
It is a letter from Hananiah, whose mission must have been official and
important, since his arrival in Egypt is mentioned as a well-known event
in 387. Unfortunately the papyrus is very imperfect, half of the lines
4-10 being lost, but enough remains to show that it contains a direction
to keep the festival of (Passover ? and) Unleavened bread, and gives instruc-
tions for doing so. What is still more remarkable is that this direction is
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 21 61
based on the authority of Darius himself. The question then arises, was
tiiis community, which possessed a temple and offered sacrifice to Ya'u,
ignorant of the greatest of Jewish national festivals ? Had they never
celebrated it before? Was it a new institution ? What had the Persian
king to do with it ? Something has already been said on these points
in the Introduction, p. xvi + . A few remarks may be added here.
In the first place, we have no evidence that the Passover before this
date was a regular annual ceremony. In the earliest documents (as
estimated by the majority of critics) it is the seven days of Unleavened
bread on which stress is laid. A national Passover-feast is unknown to
J and E. The earliest mention of it is in Deut. 16, where it is closely
related to the feast of Unleavened bread. Moreover in 2 Kings 23" it
is expressly stated of Josiah's Passover (which is usually believed to be
closely connected with the ordinance in Deut.) that such a celebration had
never been held 'v\ b&TlB" »abo 'ID* fov, . , D'BStyn »»'0 *m the days
of the Judges . . . and all the days of the kings '. If then the Passover,
as a national (but not necessarily an annual) institution, was introduced
only in 622 B.C., it is not surprising that this colony, which was probably
(already or) soon afterwards established in Egypt, should either know
nothing of it, or should regard it as intended only for residents in
Palestine, to be celebrated at Jerusalem, which indeed is the natural _\
meaning of Deut. 166. No doubt the national festival was founded on
primitive practices of some; kind, but that is a totally different question.
It is true that in the present broken condition of the papyrus the word
Passover does not occur, but I think there is reason to believe that it
was originally mentioned (see note below) and that the directions given
here agree with Deut. 1 6 in connecting the Passover and Unleavened
bread. If not, and if the papyrus refers only to the feast of Unleavened
bread, then it is still remarkable that directions were necessary for the
keeping of so old and, one would think, so well-established a festival.
In either case the explanation may be found perhaps in the rabbinical
saying quoted in the Introduction, p. xix. That ' Ezra gave the Law
a second time ' is not a paradox but a statement of historical fact. Whatever
parts of the Pentateuch were in existence before the fifth century B.C.,
it cannot be held that its provisions had any great influence on the people
in general. The earlier parts of the O.T. and the prophets, if read
without prejudice, seem to me to show quite the reverse. In fact the
kings were too much occupied with politics and other mundane matters
to enforce a ceremonial law, even if they had the desire to do so, and the
times of the Judges were too anarchic to admit of it. Josiah's great
6% ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. ai
effort is described as exceptional. Any law which is not enforced, soon
becomes a dead letter, and Josiah's institution came to nothing, while the
exile must have involved the further neglect of everything of the nature
of national festivals. It was Ezra who made modern Judaism, by
instituting (or re-instituting) the ceremonial law and formulating regula-
tions for the national festivals. The books of Ezra and Nehemiah show
this as clearly as the earlier literature shows the lack of them. The
reason why he was able to enforce the Law and thus prevent its falling
(again ?) into neglect, is that he had the support of the Persian king.
Why this was so, what caused the Persian kings to take so much interest
in the Jews, whether it was part of a general policy of religious tolerance
or was due to special circumstances, must remain matters of speculation.
The fact at any rate is evident from what we are told of Cyrus (e. g. in
Isaiah 451+), Cambyses in pap. 3013-14, and Darius here. What has
hitherto seemed incredible is that they should have concerned themselves
with details of ceremonial, as in the letter of Artaxerxes in Ezra 7, but the
present papyrus (and the style of other letters in this collection) removes
all reason for doubting the genuineness of the Persian letters in Ezra. [See
further Ed. Meyer, Die Entstehung des Judeniums, and his Papyrusfund.~\
Whether the instructions as to the manner of keeping the festival come
directly from the king, or are issued by Hananiah on his own authority,
depends mainly on the meaning of nvSJ> in 1. 3, where see note. As to
Hananiah, there is no evidence for identifying him with any person of
that name mentioned in the book of Nehemiah. His arrival in Egypt
(387) seems to have led to trouble. Was this due to his stirring up
religious zeal or national feeling in the colony and encouraging animal
sacrifices which were resented by the Egyptians? And was this the
cause of the destruction of the temple soon after (no. 30) ?
The papyrus is written on both sides, 11. 1-7 on the obverse, 11. 8-ri
on the reverse — an insignificant document for so important a com-
munication.
Sachau, plate 6. Ungnad, no. 6.
?[nn ba 1
fans*] n\*&n tik tbw [rrjjjn oainN N"*m[> fc&Jn nnua ,tj[t 2
"iw6 dJbhx by nb& vabo p xd^d cjwti \/ \// rue w amp ny:» 3
mw nyJniK ud p Dn:« nya k»[iot vbrb nDs w '•aiyn m-a 4
p"i]b \ "=? dv *iy \l \ll -> dv pi n[ay xnDDi jd»j rnb pv 5
najm^jK muy nmmi nn pan [di-un ;*rpa 1 pv nya^ 6
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 21 63
na tpJk Ten n njnao 731 wwn ?[« nap b|m \ ^ DV3i \/ ///-> twa 7
ny3E> j]d^!j \-^ dv ny n£>ek> any»[ p \////-> nr }» taxnta 8
npx n]'oi» pa nsnm ca^na i7y[ann 7K 033 nnrv 7N [op 9
N3[70 nnvm idn na nayrv p 10
Address. n}:jn D3ins Nmn^ N7"n nroaai rrrr tin [7n] 11
L.1 -^ my brethren, 2 l^Jniah and his colleagues the Jewish garfr/jw*?,
your brother Hananva^.l The welfare of my brethren may the gods' seek.
3 Now this year, the 5th year of King Darius, word was sent from the
king to Armies, saying : * In the month of Tybi{i) let there be a Passover
for the favish garrisoti\ rJow you accordingly count fourteen 5 days of
the month Ntsan and Keep the Passover^ and from the 1 5th day to the
2 1 st day oi[JVisan 8 (are) seven days of Unleavened brea<L\ Be clean and
take heed. \Do no work "^on the 15th day and on the 21st day. Also±
drink no' beeru and "anything at allTz'w Iwhich^ there is ^leaven ^do not eat,
from the 15th day from sunset till the 21st day of Nis/rw, seven 9 days, let
it not be seen among^you]; do not bring (it) into your dwellings, but seal
(it) up during Whose days. l\Lel this be done as Dar/us^the ]&ng com-
?nandedr){ Address.) n To my brethren Yedoniah and" his colleagues
the Jewish garrison, your brother Hanania^. *}
Line 1. There are traces of letters which may be restored from I. it.
Line 2 is also made more certain by 1. n. nni33 are generally
'mentioned by name. To put H"1)TV R?*n in apposition to it strikes me as
slightly contemptuous or condescending on the part of the great man.
Another mark of his importance perhaps is that he calls himself simply
Hananiah, without further description, just as Arsames does in 261.
N\"vK is plural, though used by a Jew to Jews. It had perhaps become
stereotyped in use, and had ceased to be consciously regarded as plural,
as was the case with Hebrew DTIPK. Not a pi. majestatis. At the
end we must restore, according to the regular formula, either pNw^
or py 733 17NB>\ The length of the lines can only be determined by
the amount required to complete the sense.
Line 3. NT fern, as in 30". The following date is parenthetical. It is
not 'this year is the 5th year', but 'this year (viz. the 5th year)'.
BWVl. The later spelling. IT7tP. Arnold takes this as 'I being
sent', and thinks the instructions are all given on Hananiah's own
authority. He compares Ezra 714. This is not so. rvbw is impersonal,
'orders were sent', as in 26s, 'about which orders were sent from me',
cf. 26* n^nt^ in the same sense. Ezra 714 is to be taken in the same
way, ' orders were sent from the King ' (not as RV), otherwise both
there and here a pronoun would be required. Then if an order was
64 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 21
•
sent it must be recited in what immediately follows, i.e. it was the Persian
king who decreed (without specifying details) that the festival should
lake place in due form, and words to that effect must have stood in the lost
part of 1. 4. [lES'^J or cb is needed after U'bv to introduce the decree
in 1. 4.
Line 4. If the above view is right, the first half of the line contained
the king's decree. It may be objected that there is not room, but cf.
Waidrang's order for the destruction of the temple in 307-8, consisting
of only five words. There is no need for anything more than such
a short and peremptory command : ' in the month Tybi let there
be a Passover (or a festival) for the Jewish garrison '. '•iiyn .
Dr. Fotheringham tells me that in this year Tybi 1 = Nisan 10.
N^lliT N?t6]. There is a trace of "I, and the restoration (so Sachau ;
Ungnad NHlfV) is probable. This cannot be part of Hananiah's own words.
He has already used NHirP N/TI in 1. 2. He would not have repeated it,
but would have said ' you '. It must therefore be part of the king's
message. njD evidently begins Hananiah's own comment or addition,
and (like p) is explanatory of something which preceded. The king's
message would not plunge thus in medias res without saying what it was
all about, and if it were an oratio obliqua DD3N would not be used. p
' therefore ', ' in accordance with this command just stated '.
Line 5. n[3J7]. If right, this suggests NI1DS before it, as on the
ostrakon in PSBA 1915, p. 222, xnDS p3JJn ' that she may prepare the
Passover '. This is of course a conjecture, but it is probable, and makes
the text consistent. The word NnDD could not occur anywhere after this
point. [p"0]^- The mention of the month is necessary. Probably
not [jD'J m,,J^, which would be too long.
Line 6. In the first half of the line something is wanted to explain the
significance of the seven days. The proposed restoration is merely
conjectural. The prohibition of leaven cannot have occurred here, since
it appears in 1. 7. pDT is a complete word, as there is no sign of
any letter before it, therefore not p31B>, as Pedes. The p- shows that it
comes from a r\"b (""!?) stem. Hence I take it as = p3T ' clean '.
[naynbJN is necessary.
Line 7. The beginning ought to mention the first and last days, since
work was never forbidden on all the seven days (Barth). intSTl b[tt]
cannot refer to wine, which was ordered to be drunk at the Passover,
and was never forbidden during the days of Unleavened bread. Barth
(with others) is certainly right in taking it to refer to beer, a specially
Egyptian drink, which in Mishna Pesahim 31 is forbidden, because it
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 21 65
was made of fermented grain, and so partook of the nature of leaven.
This is therefore a special prohibition necessary for Jews living in Egypt,
and there is nothing corresponding to it in Exod. or Deut. The word
used for beer in the Mishna is D1IVT (£v#os). A Greek word is unlikely
here, and nothing else is obvious. I have supplied "DK> because that
is used in the Talmud of a drink not classed as wine, but it may have
been an Egyptian word. [m TVjx is Sachau's restoration. [l^Nn^JK
would be better, but then it would be difficult to restore the next line.
Line 8. [\| III -> m> jo] is required by I -3 DV ny.
Line 9. [nniV ba] I have restored from Deut. 164. The mention of
dwellings implies the later npH3, the searching out and removal of
leaven. 1?y[jnri7N]. There is a trace of 3, not "6*11 as Ungnad, who
evidently thinks of Deut. 167, 'go into your dwellings'. But that was
after eating the Passover, and is unsuitable here. They were to go into
their dwellings and put blood on the door-posts as a protection against
the destroying angel (in Egypt). It had nothing to do with the feast
of Unleavened bread with which this part of the document is especially
concerned. The Passover is treated (in 1. 5) only as a preliminary to it.
Reading TpjOTn, the absence of a pronoun in the accusative is admissible
in a series of prohibitions like this. Barth would restore V D1H3D ?D1
. . . ?N TDn, but these words would hardly be repeated from 1. 7.
lonni . The n is uncertain. It might almost be a D. The sense would
be the same, ' seal it up ', i. e. put it away out of sight.
Line 10 ends in the middle. A possible N remains and a trace of 3.
Something of the kind restored is wanted to wind up the message.
No. 22.
Names of Contributors to Temple Funds.
419 B. C.
A very broad sheet of papyrus, containing now 7 columns of Aramaic
and the longitudinal half of a column of Demotic. On the reverse
are 3 lines.
It is very much damaged, especially col. 1 and the lower parts of the
other columns.
It contains a list of names of persons who contributed 2 shekels each
to the God Ya'u, as stated in 1. 1. The purpose of the subscription is
not further explained, but clearly it must have been for the expenses of
the temple. Col. 7 begins with a statement of the total so far, and its
apportionment, on which see note.
2599 F
66 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 21
As to the date : no king is named, and Epstein therefore takes the
gth year to be the 5th year of the revolt from Persia, which would be
about 400 b. c, and believes the money to be intended for the temple at
Jerusalem. But we have no evidence that during the revolt dates were
expressed in this way. In the only dated document of that period
(no. 35) the year of Amyrtaeus is given. As to no. 11, see notes. Nor
do we know (and it is not probable after the events of no. 30) that the
Jewish colony ever identified themselves so completely with the inimical
Egyptians as against the friendly Persian government, that they would
have adopted almost at once an era of ' freedom ' (cf. the Bar Kokhba
coins) or whatever it may have been called. As to the money being
destined for Jerusalem there is again no evidence, and the allocation of it
in col. 7 makes this highly improbable.
It is more likely that the 5th year here is the same as the 5th year
in no. 21, and that the list belongs, like many other of these texts, to
the reign of Darius II (so Seidel). Its date will then be 419 b. c. The
reason of the omission of the king's name perhaps is that the document is
not of an official or legal character, but contains merely internal accounts
of Yedoniah's office. Up to the end of col. 6 the subscriptions are for
the month Phamenoth, and the list was no doubt kept in the office to
receive additions as the money was paid. The style of the writing, which
is rather cursive and hasty, agrees with this view. In such a document
it is natural that the name of the king should be taken for granted. It
was a temporary record, not for permanent use, nor intended for reference
in the far future.
The contributions are probably connected with Hananiah's mission in
some way. Perhaps his (re-)institution of (Passover and) Unleavened
bread was part of a religious revival, and the money was wanted for
sacrifices. It may in that case have led to the hostility which caused the
destruction of the temple. Or of course it may have been a customary
contribution, like the half-shekel at Jerusalem. The suggestion that the
money was for rebuilding the temple (cf. nos. 32, 33), and that the date
is therefore after 408 b. c, carries no weight. You cannot build a temple
on a half-crown subscription.
There are several traces of palimpsest, as though the papyrus had been
cleaned and used again at intervals.
Sachau, plates 17-20. Ungnad, no 19.
v\h fjDD an* ij w»iin» nWi nnosy nar \l/// nap Pinru»ab\//n 1
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 22 67
Col. 1. // p v\D2 n*on» -12 n[^]io3 n[n]3 n[»yjtro^ 2
//e> eps nnT "13 npvnn in] tdk" 3
//t? c]D3 pin -13 yenn n[*n n]n:^ 4
[ /]// fa— 5
[n]^> //p e)D3 in nuta[n»a "D y]Bnn^" 6
[ni? // t? f|D3 njajfi -13 nwin 13 [in: -n rw~]wn^ 7
n^ //b> bid3 n[. . ]T55^ 8
rb II p P)D3 i?n3 ["13] r53 9
n^> //{? [S|D3 . . . jliT 13 10
r6 l[/p «p3] no[nD m3 n3]n: n3 . n
.... [n]3 yjy -13 jn[a 1 2
[n]H3t m[3] *. . . . 13
. . . 14
. . . [jrjta m[3 15
.... m3 16
. . . . [i]3 » 17
. ... ma 18
pap nxo f>3 19
[D]mtD 13 Di^t? -""apinaa nso 20
Col. 2. n!> //^ 3 mot? 13 d^o^" 21
n^J //^3 H3^6 "13 ^B^ 22
r6 H v [3] *rarm 13 mm -13 n^ta-"" 23
r$ /]/p 3 3Tb* "13 mo^-^'-g 24
nb [/]/b> [3 n]"nD3tt -a b!>b>» na h-in-^ 25
\rb Jiv 3 n^]S0K> na in *>isn "13 btob^ 26
rb /iw 3 in d^jd n3 i&d^ 27
rb jfw 3 in niDP "13 bina^" 28
ni? //&? 3 hxn 13 "jn -d d^b"" 29
ni> //e> 3 S>wn "13 "Jn na hvn-^ 30
l[ nNo] ^5 31
/!& 32
♦ j //ts» 5 33
34
./ 35
l' 2
68 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 22
36
// V 5 37
38
Col. 3. U\V 3] VW 13 &&^ 39
//[t$> a] nai "in niir^ 4°
//[ts> a] nta in yi»K>^ 41
Ji\v 3 n^a-p 13 ino-""" 42
//[p 3 .... "u rrvJ&K 43
[ 13 »]aajK" 44
//[> ]3T^ 45
[ ]*aay^ 46
[//tj> 3] pna -13 [sflBW' 47
//[> 3 ] 13 [. . . .K^ 48
//&> [3 . . . .]3 ">n D -' • •] 49
/[/£> 3 J 5°
. . . rWW» 13 [..*...] 13 [... .] 51
//&» [3 ] 52
/[/&> 3 ] 53
...».- 54
//[£> ] 55
//& 3 ytpin [ ] 56
[//#] 3 taw [ ] 57
// v 3 ^[y ] 58
. . . rv3&» ( .] 59
60
Col. 4. /A»a nao 13 ycin^ 61
//ty 3 jno 13 onm^ 62
// v 3 <an 13 )ina^ 63
// b> 3 k3*e 13 *an-^ 64
//e»3 nix 13 norno-^ 65
// B> 3 Nn3T 13 ttbw^ 66
//e>3 ansr 13 omo^ 67
// K> 3 niK 13 i?rtm^T^ 68
// tr 3 nao 13 n»s^ 69
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 22 69
// B» 3 Dr«D "13 jrcftn]-"' 7 1
//p 3 mn "13 'SFK* 72
//ca t^pb 13 nix "13 an[j&] 73
74
//tf3 75
//t?3 ino 76
//tf a fJlD "l[3 . , . .] 77
#/a.-7- ,
//^3 *D13_T3_0mo "13 N'[?U]5 78
//t?a *DiaJn3j_Drup-n3 (;-i]TrK" 79
// k> 3 ytr[inj "13 n^i^a-^ 80
//C3 nnBM -i3 [^a]y ma ncroo^" 81
£1 nn» nnx //^a n[. , ,] rna rxhvo^ 82
Col. 5. //y 3 TriDU ma nnso-^ 83
//^a jna rna y»tnrr^ 84
//pa d^ "13 nm ma rpatp-"' 85
//^a »nj ma ntj-k" 86
//pa d^b^o ma snww^ 87
//pa chv ma nnaa'^"?"? 88
//pa pw "13 ^D^a ma han^ 89
//pa ypia ma WMK"* 9°
//pa nDno ma nanj-"" 91
//pa ina* ma frnn^ 92
//pa trbax ma no^co^ 93
94
/[/pa . . . .] ma ne[n]3S 95
//p[a , . .]? ma nam 96
//pa d[S>p] ma i>wrv 97
//pa mar ia ypin rna xnaw^"*"^^ 98
//pa w ma pdbw"' 99
//pa pro rna *[n»]aN^' 100
Col. 6. //pa rrha ma |rnn^" 101
//cd n: rna m^D^" 102
(C3 n^ ma tavr^ 103
70 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 22
//b>3 ytm ma ityyax^ 104
//^a moy ni3 "6jnrv^" 105
//eo iT^av ma rinso-"" 106
//pa liar ma naro-^ 107
//tso Tijy "13 .tjt rna neroo^*?"^^ 108
//fc}>3 »nyo "13 tbwo^ 109
//k>3 rrfcua ma no^o^ no
//co pro 13 rv^Q 13 pro-"" m
//k>3 mrwi ma haw""" 112
[//p]a jro ^ 113
//&> .Ti3[T T14
//t^s n , , » na jro na ^ 115
//&>3 n[ . . ♦ . -i]3 nbv ia ^ 116
//c^3 pp ma y&rijfy 117
//tf 3 nix 13 msnr^ n8
//^3 n*y»B> 13 d^d— "'"^'^■^■^ 119
Col. 7. T3 in NOT' Dp n KSD3 120
ipina&fi m»a nnoa ia mt 121
// /// /// ;^pp \->"5 jtjna ejoa 122
//////& /I -9* \7ib wa 123
\/// /// jBna iwv3BB>&6 124
//-> }B>-i3 ^D3 tarvaroifc 125
//ko yetPMiT 13 mm^ 126
//^3 rniin 13 jna 13 y^fcK" 127
//^3 *jjy 13 jna 13 vn«"^ 128
//b>3 hvn 13 rrnry-"" 129
//[pa njre 13 itob*^ 130
// 131
//b>3 . . »3 ma n . . . .^" 132
Reverse. niivb Hvi >nw\ 13 pfija^ 133
ni> //e^3 idit 13 *n»v^ 134
\// atab //b>3 .ttibbo 13 *jrr" 135
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 22 71
Col. i.
1 On the 3rd of Phamenoth, 5th year. This is (a list of) the names of
the Jewish garrison who gave money for Ya'u the God, man by man the
sum of 2 shekels : 2 — Meshu//V/wrth daughter of Gemarz'ah b. Mahseiah,
the sum of 2 sh. 3 — Zaccur b. HodaviaXi b. Zaccur, the sum of 2 sh.
4 — SeraiaA daughter of Hoshea b. Harman, the sum of 2 sh. 5 — All
3 . . . . 6 — Hoshm b. £e/hz\x\\in, he (gave (?)) the sum of 2 sh. for
himself (?). 7 — Hoshaziz/z b. Nathan b. Hoshaiah b. Hananifl/z the sum of
2 sh. for himself "(?). 8 — Nabu . . . . b ah, the sum of 2 sh. for
himself (?). 9 nani b. KTL, the sum of 2 sh. for himself (?).
10 b. Ya'u . ... the sum of 2 sh. for himself (?). n b.
Nehebelh daughter of Afahseh, the sum of 2 sh. for himself (?). 12 Nathan
b. Anani b 13 i daughter of Zebaditf^ .... 14
lr> daughter of Pelulz'a/z .... 16 daughter of
17 i b 18 daughter of 19 All <?/"the company of
Siniddin. 20 The company of Nabu'akab : — Shallum b. Menah^z/z ....
Col. ii.
21 — Meshullam b. Samuah, sum of 2 sh. for himself (?). 22 — Palti b.
Michah, sum of 2 sh. for himself (?). 23 — Malchiah b. Yathom b. Hadad-
nuri, sum of 2 sh. for himself (?). 24 20 — Shelemiah b. Jashub, sum of
2 sh. for himself (?). 25 — Gadol b. Meshullam b. Mibtahi<z/z, sum of 2 sh.
for himself (?). 26 — Menahem b. Hazul, that (is) the son of Shemaz'a/z,
sum of 2 sh.for himself (J). 27 — Simak b. Meshullam, he (gave) the sum
of 2 sh. for himself (?). 28 — Gadol b. Samuah, he (gave) the sum of
2 sh. for himself(?). 20 — Meshullam b. Haggai b. Hazul, sum of 2 sh.
for himself (?). 30 — Hazul b. Haggai b. Hazul, sum of 2 sh. for him-
self (?). 31 All of the company of u. 32 2 sh.
33 sum of 2 sh. 34 3r>
36 37 sum of 2 sh.
Col. iii.
33 — Shillem b. Hodav sum of 2 sh. 40 — Hori b. VNH sum of 2 sh.
41 — Shamua' b. Shillem sum of 2 sh. 42 — Mattan b. Yedonz'a/z, sum
of 2 sh. 43 — Uriah b , sum of 2 sh. 44 — Ananz' b
45 — Zac 2 4G — Anani 47 — Hoslw b. Nathun
sum of 2 sh. 48 20 — b 2 49 b. N
2 sh. 50 2 sh. 51 .... b .... b. Joshibiah ....
52 2 sh. 53 2 sh. 54
55 2 sh. 56 Hoshea, sum of 2 sh. 57
Ya'utal, sum of 2 sh. 58 A nam, sum of 2 sh. 5!)
Joshibiah ... 60
Col. iv.
6i_Hoshea b. SGRI, sum of 2 sh. 62— Menahem b. Mattan, sum of
2 £h. 63— Nathun b. Haggai, sum of 2 sh. 64 — Haggai b. Micha, sum
of 2 sh. °5 — Mahseh b. Uri, sum of 2 sh. 6C — Shallum b. Zecharia,
72 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 22
sum of 2 sli. C7 — Menahemb. Zecharia, sum of 2 sh. 68 40 — Meshullak
b. Uri, sum of 2 sh. C9 — Pamut b. SGRI, sum of 2 sh. 70 — Anani
b. Ma'uzi, sum of 2 sh. 71- — //tfshea b. Menahem, sum of 2 sh.
72 — Haggai b. Huria, sum of 2 sh. 73 — Jl/etiahem b. Uri b. Meshullak,
sum of 2 sh. 74 75 sum of 2 sh.
70 Mattan, sum of 2 sh. 77 b. Mattan, sum of 2 sh.
78 Pe««/iah b. Menahem b. Posai, sum of 2 sh. 7J — Hon' b. Menahem b.
Posai, sum of 2 sh. 80 — Pcluliah b. //oshea, sum of 2 sh. 81 — Mena-
hemeth daughter of k?ia?ii b. 'STH, sum of 2 sh. 82 — Meshullemeth
daughter of ... . ah, sum of 2 sh. Sister of Mahath and S . . . (?).
Col. v.
83 — Mephatteah daughter of TSTZ, sum of 2 sh. 84 — Ya'ushama'
daughter of Nathan, sum of 2 sh. 85— Shabith daughter of Hon b.
Shillem, sum of 2 sh. 8C — Re'ia daughter of Neri, sum of 2 sh.
87 — Ya'ushama' daughter of Meshullam, sum of 2 sh. 88 60 — Mephatteah
daughter of Shillem, sum of 2 sh. 89 — Yahmol daughter of Palti b. Yeosh,
sum of 2 sh. 90 — Abihi daughter of Oshea, sum of 2 sh. 91 — Nehebeth
daughter of Mahseh, sum of 2 sh. 92 — Ya'uhan daughterof Yigdal,sum of 2 sh.
93 — Meshullemeth daughter of Zephalia, sum of 2 sh. 94
95 Mena/^melh daughter of sum 0/2 sh. 9G Nehebeth daughter of
Z . . . sum of 2 sh. 97 Yahmol daughter of Shillem, sum of 2 sh.
98 70 — Ya'ushama' daughter of Hoshea b. Zaccur, sum of 2 sh. " — Ya'u-
shama' daughter of Haggai, sum of 2 sh. 10° Abz'^i daughter of Nathun,
sum of 2 sh.
Col. vi.
101 — Ya'uhan daughter of Gedaliah, sum of 2 sh. 102 — Salluah
daughter of Neri, sum of 2 sh. 103 — Ya'utal daughter of Yislah, sum of
2 sh. 104 — Ab'osher daughter of Hoshea, sum of 2 sh. 105 — Ya'u'alai
daughter of Immanuiah, sum of 2 sh. 106 — Mephatteah daughter of
Zephaliah, sum of 2 sh. 107 — Nehebeth daughter of Zaccur, sum of 2 sh.
108 g0 — Menahemeth daughter of Yedoniah b. 'Anathi, sum of 2 sh.
109 — Meshullam b. Ma'uzi, sum of 2 sh. no — Meshullemeth daughter of
Penuliah, sum of 2 sh. 1X1 — Nathun b. Pelaliah b. Nathun, sum of 2 sh.
112 — Hazul daughter of Hodaviah, sum of 2 sh. li3 —
Nathan, sum of 2 ^. lu Z^badiah .... 2 sh. 115 —
b. Nathan b h, sum of 2 sh. 116 — b. Shillem b h, sum
of 2 sh. 117 — -Fa'wshama' daughter of Ron, sum of 2 sh. 118 — Re'uiah
b. Uri, sum of 2 sh. 119 90 — Meshullam b. Shemaiah, sum of 2 sh.
Col. vii.
120 The money which was paid on that day into the hand of 121 Yedo-
niah b. Gemaiiah in the month of Phamenoth, (was) 122 the sum of
31 kerashin 8 shekels, 123 of which 12 k 6 sh. for Ya'u, m 7 kerashin for
Ishumbethel, 125 the sum of 12 kerashin for 'Anathbethel. 126 — Micaiah
b. Ya'uyishma', sum of 2 sh. 127 — Oshea' b. Nathan b. Hodaviah, sum
of 2 sh. 128 — Ahio b. Nathan b. Anani, sum of 2 sh. 123 — Azariah
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 22 73
b. Hazul, sum of 2 sh. 130 — joshibiah b, Berechitf//, sum of 2 j^.
131 2 . . 132 — . . . . h daughter of Ki . . . ., sum
of 2 sh.
(Reverse.)
133— Megaphernes b. VSHI, sum of 2 sh. for 'NDM (?). 1:u— VSHI
b. ZDMR, sum of 2 sh. for himself (?). 135 — Haggai b. Miphtahiah, sum
of 2 sh. for . . . (?).
Line 1 extends across the top of cols. 1 and 2. nniDU> flat, a careless
construction, literally ' this (document) is (a list of) the names'. N?*n.
The garrison was co-extensive with the colony. Many of the names are
feminine. 3fl* 1 loosely used for 'quorum quisque dedit '. Gram-
matically the antecedent is N?*n. VI*?, but see below on 11. 123 + .
//c? restored from what follows. There is perhaps a trace of B\
Line 2. The stroke at the beginning marks off the separate items, as
frequently in accounts, cf. no. 81.
Line 3. n[,1Tin], cf. 2018 (420 b.c). A man was often named after
his grandfather.
Line 4. [n]n^ is hardly enough to fill the space. The name (as
niasc.) is biblical.
Line 5. [/J// ?a . so Ungnad, but it might be a C (e. g. /// /// J?pB> ?a),
or even a » (. . . riND ?3), cf. 1. 9.
Line 6. in and n? (restored from 1. 8 + ) must denote some special
modification of the entry. For "in cf. 11. 26-8, not in any other complete
line. This line begins a new section which is distinguished by the
use of n? in 11. 6-1 1, the other lines being incomplete. The next section
(11. 20-30) also has n?, otherwise only 1. 134. It may mean 'for him',
i.e. for Ya'u, or 'for himself, cf. Hl^xb in 1. 135, which is equally
obscure, or it may be some note that the money has been paid or has not
been paid. It is always at the end of the line.
Line 7. [jro '2 n*y]t?Vl is supplied from 405. nwin alone would not
fill the space, and another short name is required. [n]*:5n doubtful.
Ungnad rMBX.
Line 8 and the following lines are too much broken for restoration.
U5 (Ungnad) is very doubtful. There seems to be a space after it,
which excludes [majlIU or [|ro]U3.
Line 9. ?n5 doubtful. An impossible name.
Line 11. Cf. 1. 91. In 1. 25 a man is distinguished by his mother's
name.
Line 12. There are traces of |n[j]. Cf. 832, and below, 1. 128.
Line 14. Perhaps there was no name here — which would make the
total right in 1. 24.
74 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 22
Line 19. riNft apparently = cen/i/n'a, a subdivision (?) of the degel.
plV = Sin-iddin is probably right. We should expect D, but cf. ywrttP
Ahikar 3, &c, and p*lHB> Nerab i1. The line below marks the close
of the section.
Line 20 the beginning of a new section, continued in the next column.
Line 21. From this point 3 is written for f]DD.
Line 22. nyi5, a badly written D, which looks like two letters.
Line 24. nib* (Ungnad) rather than 3TB* (Sachau, for iTon^). The
"3 in the margin gives the total number of persons up to this point.
Line 27. "]0>d an unknown name. Ungnad suggests a mistake for
"JED>; cf. IITIJCD, I Chron. 267.
Line 31 another summation, like 1. 19, closing the section.
Line 38. Faint traces of a line.
Line 39. &W (Ungnad), not E?£\ which would be written plene.
Hin shortened from ."Win, for which there is not room.
Line 40. "Hiri, cf. 1. 85. Egyptian? The 1 is badly written, and "I
may be 1. mi, Ungnad compares iTOl, Ezra io3G.
Line 42. |D» for mn», Ezra io37.
Line 43. Ungnad reads pN, but there is no name beginning so.
Line 45. Either Tar or !T">3T — probably the latter, as there is a faint
trace of a possible 1. There were three names in this line.
Line 47. Cf. 33s.
Line 48. The 20 in the margin is difficult. There is a 3 at 1. 24.
If this were a continuation of the same reckoning it ought to be "3"3,
and some of the broken lines must have had no names. It is more
probably a new total of a list beginning at I. 32 (since 1. 31 ends a
section). In that case three lines are lost at the end of col. 2. No line
is lost at the top of col. 3. Then col. 2 was one line longer than col. r,
and the detached fragment should be moved lower down. Without
seeing the original papyrus it is impossible to know whether this can
have been so.
Line 57. ^Din"1 not necessarily masc. as Ungnad says. He compares
$>B*2K, bwn in O.T. In 1. 103 it is fern. See note on 1. 11. The
name means ' Ya'u is a protection ', cf. njOTins n ntan often in Behistun.
Line 61. yfc"in. The n like that in 1. 84. It might possibly be yt^N.
Line 68. The total "3"3 here and afterwards is correct.
Line 69. nED, Egyptian = Tlafxv6rj<;, is Ungnad's suggestion. Cf. 724.
Line 72. "5n. The name must be short. The 1 is probable, and
there are traces of an. smn carelessly for nniS*.
Line 73. fyvD, cf. 1. 68.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 22 75
Line 78. «"[^0]5 or N<[M]s, cf. 1. 80. Ungnad suggests totals.
For the other names cf. 1 21.
Line 79. [njin. Ungnad's [»]an is hardly possible. Cf. 1. 40.
Line 81. [H33]y a conjecture to fit the space. nnDX Egyptian,
compound of Isis ?
Line 82. '31 Jinx. Sachau takes this as a new entry, and reads nntf
//•J'3 nn». But as Ungnad remarks, the name would not be omitted,
and this would make the total (in I. 88) wrong. Seidel compares
Phoenician nriE^ in an inscription in the Louvre, of which the meaning
is obscure. [Usually taken as 'exact' or 'standard' money, but that
is a mere guess. It might go with the clause following and be = jyo^,
cf. perhaps (?) Assyr. ana muMi.~\ nnN here can only be 'sister',
and nno can only be a proper name. The next letter looks as though it
were joined on (in TO). The two strokes may be a B\ as Sachau and
Ungnad (' sister of M and S '), or the numeral //. Perhaps the former
is better.
Line 83. nnso very strange, but supported by 11. 88, 106. fnDD.
The tn is written over an erasure.
Line 85. ]VX>, cf. rvmB> fern, and TDtS> masc. in no. 8r.
Line 86. nj for rvu — but the n is like a 1.
Line 88. nnso, cf. 1. 83. The scribe wrote nn», then rubbed out the
O and wrote a S, adding aOin the margin. This shows that the oblique
initial stroke was added after the line was written — perhaps as the entries
were checked off, or to show that the money was paid.
Line 89. ^»rv, cf. 1. 97.
Line 93. N^DV, cf. 1. 106. Seidel and Lidzbarski think = TfXH.
Line 96. . . . T might be part of e. g. a J. In 1. 107 "VDT mi mnj
occurs. The same person would hardly be named twice.
Line 98. The marginal number (70) was added after the line was
written. It overlaps into the text and covers the oblique stroke. Note
that from 1. 81 to 1. 108 the contributors are all women.
Line 103. n^D'' over an erasure.
Line 114. n*n5[T]. Ungnad iT3a[x].
Line 117. |"ip short for TOip.
Line 120. Here begins the total of receipts so far. Dp 'stood',
i. e. was received. in NOV, i. e. the 3rd of Phamenoth, cf. 1. 1.
Line 121. Yedoniah the head of the community, as in no. 30.
Line 122. The arithmetic is not very satisfactory. Since 1 karash =
10 shekels (Introduction, p. xxiii), 31 k. 8 sh. = 318 sh. representing the
contributions of 159 persons at 2 sh. each. As the list now stands,
76 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 22
the first numeration (to 1. 30) makes 26 persons, the second (to 1. 119)
makes 91 : total 117 persons. We thus require 42 more persons (or 42
lines at least), making two more columns. These can only have stood at
the beginning. Further the total of 31 k. 8 sh. does not agree with the
sums allocated, which amount to 31 k. 6 sh. only. Two shekels are
therefore not accounted for.
Line 123. 133 as often in accounts. Lit. 'in it are 12 k. ' &c, i.e.
it is divided into 12 k. &c. The most difficult point about the docu-
ment is the allocation of the money. The heading says it was for Ya'u,
but here only 12 k. 6 sh. are assigned to Ya'u out of 31 k. 8 sh. The
rest is divided between what seem to be two other deities. Were they
then regarded as other manifestations of Ya'u ? See Introduction, p. x.
Line 126 after a blank space, begins a supplementary list.
Line 129. rpT?y over an erasure, and uncertain.
Line 130. n*3B» rather than myt^ (Ungnad). [n]>5n3 doubtful.
Ungnad ^N'33 , which is no name. There is a trace of PI .
Reverse, three lines.
Line 133. pan. Why was a Persian contributing? TICI probably
also Persian. D"i:&i\ The X is strangely formed and uncertain. The
word is unintelligible. It would seem to indicate the destination of the
money, cf. rb above.
Line 134. "iDll. The D is badly formed, like ::. The name should
be Persian, or Babylonian (Zeri-Nannar ?).
Line 135. \// 2uh probable, but inexplicable. Ungnad's iTOB? is
impossible.
No. 23.
List of Names. Probably about 420 b. c.
Another list of names, for what purpose is unknown.
It is undated, but put here because the writing is very like that of
no. 22 (and no. 19), and some of the names appear in both. See notes
below. Its date is therefore probably about 420 b. c.
As 1. 8 is marked 10 in the margin, two lines must be lost at the top.
There is nothing to show whether anything is lost at the end. Another
10 on the left-hand side belongs to another column, now lost.
Sachau, plate 23. Ungnad, no. 22.
in: 13 v.nN 1
rrnyD 13 In: 2
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 23 77
M3 13 mn 3
taur 13 rono 4
D:na in pn 5
• . , n na mta 6
ffio 13 -d^d 7
■» niTy 13 »b>d-> 8
nin ia DJnDs 9
mar 13 myi 10
jno 13 orao 11
Ti3T 13 D3n3 12
n"3V3 13 ^n 13
IDTO 13 <1tt* 13 11 14
■T13T 13 KW 15
1 Ahio b. Nathan. 2 Nathan b. Ma'uziah. 3 Hur b. Benaiah (?).
4 Mahseh b. Ya'utal. 5 Hanan b. Pekhnum. 6 Shallum b. H . . . .
7 Palti b. Mattan(?). 8 10 Kushi b. Azzur. 9 Petekhnum b. Hori.
10 Re'uiah b. Zechariah. u Menahem b. Mattan. 12 Pekhnum b. Zaccur.
13 Haggai b. Micaiah. 14 Didi (?) b. Uri b. Mahseh. 15 Sheva b.
Zechariah.
Line 1. Cf. 22128 (419 b. c), and 2519 (416 b. c).
Line 2. On the principle that a man often bears the name of his
grandfather, this may be the son (or father) of Ma'uziah b. Nathan in
2016 (420 b.c), cf. also 332 (407 b. c).
Line 3. rV33, so Ungnad. Seidel compares 2240 PU1 = IWI = iTJ3 (?).
The name fM3 is possible, or HIS, and there is a mark above the line
which suggests PIvMfi, with the letters written close together.
Line 5. D^riQ, Egyptian, as in 1. 12, but the other name in each case
is Jewish.
Line 7. \T\D. The O is very uncertain. Sachau reads }n33, and it is
certainly more like 3J, but no such name exists. His suggestion that it is
for )riJ133 is not very probable. Even the n is doubtful. It looks more
like a > with an accidental stroke below.
Line 11. Cf. 2 2G2.
Line 13. Cf. 2 264.
Line 14. 11. The first letter seems to be a correction. There is no
name HI (or »Tl). Sachau suggests that it is for iT*l*T .
Line 15. NIB', cf. 1 Chron. 249.
7»
No. 24.
Account of Com supplied. Probably 419 b. c.
Fragments of a document in three columns, containing a list of names
of persons in receipt of rations as members of the garrison of Syene,
with a note of the amount received by each. It is related to no. 2 in
character, though not of the same date (see below), and may indeed be
a report like that promised in 2U (}H |riJ3, see note there). Cf. also
no. 1 7 (ten years earlier) which refers to some such statement of accounts.
It thus differs entirely from no. 22. As Sachau points out, there is
nothing specially Jewish about it. It is another proof that Aramaic was
used not only in dealing with Jews, but was the official language of the
provincial governments in the Persian empire. The decipherment is
very difficult as the names are mostly foreign, and the papyrus is much
torn.
As to the date: 1. 34 mentions the 4th year, and if the restoration of
1. 35 is accepted, we may conclude that the list was drawn up in the
5th year. From the resemblance to no. 2 it is tempting to take these as
years of Xerxes, which would make the date 481 B.C., but the writing
(especially of col. 1) is so much later in style than that of no. 2, that it
seems necessary to put it, with the majority of these texts, in the reign of
Darius II. It will then belong to the same year as no. 22, viz. 419 b. c.
Sachau, plates 21, 22. Ungnad, no. 20.
Col. r. \nk> 1»p[n nn n]o[D]a [>] 1
\kk> T^uj -o . our v 2
\NB> [n]*!»B> "13 »an V 3
\[t*B> J?Jd[N "13 f]73C?N P 4
\[np] finer "13 »dbb & 5
in \np rb . . nay [na] xnx^v 6
\\=i \NES> [ . n]T6B> E»3J
Tin » 8
B> 9
II W ^V 10
[\N]B> JD3 . , . . tJ> 11
[\Kti>] vibm , , , , b> 12
\kk> Bwm i[3 -n]n w 13
\KtJ> J3^3 "13 nj[£>£>]tJ> P 14
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 24 79
»nu nn i-ii c 15
1 1 -1 I xv fyip "ia [-i]in pa 16
I XP W3N -13 ... g? C 17
I xp nnB p 18
a»n» . . .
tea na[no . . .
Col. 2. in I XB> *3B . . . T . . X W3p 19
20
"^> , , 21
\xp , a . . . jy . . . 22
nb> ... 23
24
\XP jnJDD -13 ... . 25
I xp nis -i3 b5. . . 26
///kb6 //-i I kb> nni> [// b^33 ^3 28
//"3 NK^ I XP nnb //"3 [B>B3 b 29
// ///->-z}-z}-^ nc»[^ II n ll]xp nn^> ->"^ pb[3 ba 30
. . . fv xnpB3 ^[3 31
■^ I k|> 32
... 13 xnv
. . . n
. * * o
Col. 3. ... nv p] toaaaiD xW 2'n[' n xn>D3 ^3 33
dv ny \/// naa> -i»n[o rrr& "3 01} in 34
, . . boa aw n [\/ /// nap "vn]oi> "3 35
-iD3i T3 X3 nano [10 ] wn 36
. . Tx -o nnjh nix -13 13 37
/ /// n |/a in in -=n-^y \in *|[!>l « l"W]v 38
vb']rb air n xsna D-inp[n] -ii5[y] jot 39
|/[/] /// ///=^ ef>N JO 40
. . . n I : /i^^*> [if tf'l xn[ia 41
8o ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 24
p ] xb'rb p|ns Tn[> ] »n 42
T3T3^"»6 /////// ejb[« N MB]tWi 43
rot? "vn» 44
Kp)« 45
/// iii->-m-4* 46
. . . n N^r6 ...
. . . wn . . .
Col. i.
1 Ration of Petemut(?) b. Ismn, barley anlab 1. 2 Ration of Zbis.
b. Nebushalliv, barley ardab 1. 3 Ration of Haggai b. Shemaiah, barley
ardab 1. 4 Ration of Ismn b. Ap', barley ardab 1. 5 Ration of Petisi b.
Zaphruth, barley ardab 1. 6 Ration of — Zeho b. Zphr . . for him barley
ardab 1 . . . (?). 7 K. Ration of Samuah barley ardab 1 and 2
quarters. 8 Ration of Hor 9 Ration of 10 Ration of
— 2 (?). n Ration of Nathan, barley ardab 1.
12 Ration of Ahlbni, barley ardab 1. 13 Ration of Hur b.
Nurshavash, barley ardab 1. u Ration of Shamashgiriya b. Belbani,
barley ardab 1. *5 Ration of Vrd b. Zuthi. 16 K. Ration of Hur. b.
Y'ulu, barley ardab 1 and 2 quarters. 17 Ration of b. Abihu,
barley ardab 1. 18 Ration of phri, barley ardab i.
Col. ii.
19 barley ardab 1 . . . (?). 20
21 100. 22 barley ardab 1. 23
barley ardab. 24 25 b. Ptntu, barley
ardab 1. 2G . . . nkl b. Uri, barley ardab 1.
27 ... . Total persons 54, including 28 total persons 2 at \\ ardabs of
barley each, = barley ardabs 3. 29 total persons 22 at 1 ardab of barley
each,=barley ardabs 22. 30 total person?, 30 at 2-| ardabs of barley each,
= barley ardabs 75. 31 . . . total output a??iounting to 32 . . . . barley
ardabs 100.
Col. Hi,
33 Total output of what was Slivered to the garrison of Syene from
the . . . 34 that is the 20th day of the month Mehir in the 4th year, to the
35 20th of Mehir in the ^th year. What was delivered as food . . . which
3G brought from the district of Thebes by the hand of Onophris,
37 .... b. Br'vh, and 'Edri b. A . . . 38 Barley ardabs 1446, g 2, h 4.
39 And of corn (?) of Tstrs, the ration which was given out to the
garrison 40 from (?) 1019. 41 1252, g i, h . . .
42 And what was given as a ration to the garrison .... from
43 TStrs, ardabs 1690.
44 Mehir, year . . . . 45 and from . . . 4G
XX76 ....
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 24 81
Line I. The B> at the beginning is restored because it stands before
each line of this column. Sachau suggests that it is for 7pK>, as else-
where, but then what is its meaning ? It is more likely to be some
word for 'portion', 'ration', like "WW. [n]5[cJ5, cf. riOD 2 269.
Egyptian. pefs] last letter very doubtful, as in 1. 4. Hardly PD&K.
\N£>. Judging from no. 2 this must be for \ 3~HN pyu>, the allowance of
the man named, for how long? Sachau and Ungnad take it for se'u
(tItt °f a shekel), which is unlikely.
Line 2. 'lfel33, cf. 28.
Line 3. "un is certain. Not ^an as Sachau. It is a narrow 3 as in
1. 14.
Line 4. [y]5[K] quite uncertain. It must be a very short name, cf. 53'"'.
Line 5. nriST uncertain. Sachau pin, but n is impossible.
Line 6. The oblique stroke as in 1. 10. Cf. no, 22. . . 1S¥ un-
ceitain. Sachau . , Tin which is possible. rb and in as in no. 22.
Line 7. The 3 is taken by Sachau for ep3, but the list has nothing to
do with payments in money. Here and in 1. 16 are the only two cases
in which the ration is \\n \Ntt>, which may be a mere coincidence, but in
any case the meaning of 3 is obscure.
Line 12. ^3^nS uncertain. Sachau reads [nj^n N, but it is difficult
to see what N can belong to, since the preceding word ought to be "12 .
What Sachau reads as p is the same combination as in }3^3, 1. 14.
Line 13. [Ti]n or . . n. It must be a short name.
Line 14. na^ojt? is Ungnad's suggestion, but the second W is hardly
possible.
Line 16. |hy or l^iy (Sachau).
Line 17. ITOK more probably than in "OX, since this in (1. 6) comes at
the end of the line.
Col. ii.
Lines 19-26 are too much broken to be restored.
Line 25. "jnaDD. The last letter may be anything. Egyptian.
Lines 27-32 sum up the account so far. As the total number of
persons to this point is 54, about half the names are lost. This cannot
be the whole N^n, cf. no. 22.
Line 28. One would naturally restore II p33, but that the strange
expression E>BJ ^?3 followed by a numeral is used in 1. 30. The two
persons are those marked with 3 in lines 7 and 16. I take 1 as Nny3T
Therefore 2 persons at 1^ each = 3.
Line 30. If 30 persons get 75, each must have z\. Hence we may
restore [111 IIJnc Cf. 27 where II: = II n here.
82 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 24
Line 31. . . . JV must be some word for ' amount to '. Thus :
2 at i£ = 3
22 at 1 = 22
30 at 2\ = 75
Total 54 get 100
■
Col. iii.
The left-hand fragment seems to have been set too much to the left.
Probably 1. 40 reads continuously, and if so there is less to be supplied
in the other lines than Sachau shows.
Line 33. STP *t NnpQJ if right, is a clumsy expression for 'expenses,
namely, what was paid '. K^aJID, cf. p331D 33s, ' Syenians '. Sachau
explains it as a Persian formation in -kan, which is then inflected as
Aramaic. The form J032BnB> ' of Susa ', in Ezra 4°, is scarcely parallel,
unless that be a mistake for N,J3JB>1ts>. At the end something is missing,
for there is a faint trace of a letter, and some words are wanted to connect
with the next line. Judging from the ordinary formula in contract?,
[D*]1 in in 1. 34 implies a parallel date here containing the name of the
Jewish month. This makes the line rather long, for in 1. 34 there seems
to be nothing after DV IV- However, the lines vary very much in length
in this document. If the Jewish month was mentioned here, it points
to the conclusion that the ' Syenian garrison ' was the same as, or part of,
the NHIi"!* N^TI, and that these accounts relate to the Jewish colony. The
IV in 1. 34 implies a }» somewhere before, and it can only come here.
As to the Jewish month, Dr. Fotheringham tells me that in year 4 of
Darius the 20th of Mehir would coincide with the 19th of Iyyar* and in
year 5 with the 30th of Iyyar.
Line 34. ["3 Dl]"1 is restored from 1. 35 for reasons given in the note
there. DV IV- The line might end with DV in "PK^ ~>"^, but
probably the date was expressed singly the second time. Similarly nT is
omitted before "Vno in 1. 35.
Line 35. V ^ n^ is restored here for several reasons. The two
broken names of months, one ending in TTT and the other beginning
with "D, seem likely to be both *vn£, which could only recur at an interval
of a year (or years). The mention of ' year 4 ' in 1. 34 suggests that the
account ran into another year. The large, though uncertain, totals imply
a long period. In Greek papyri of the second century b.c the ration
(o-itwviov) of corn seems to have been 1 artaba of corn per man per
month, together with a cash payment in lieu of more corn. See e. g.
Kenyon, Greek Papyri in the British Museum, p. 55. Probably it was
about the same at the date of this papyrus. It appears, therefore, that
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 24 83
down to 1. 26 we have a list of men receiving the monthly ration, some
getting the minimum of 1 ardab (\NC), others more. LI. 27-32 then
give the summary for the month. Col. 3 gives the totals for the year.
i\ begins a fresh entry. There is a space before it. The preceding
lines were the heading. £>31D3. Sachau is no doubt right in taking
this for i>3NCQ, cf. "mvb 322. Epstein eft. KD^SO, &c. and translates ' by
measure '. Some words are wanted after it to connect with the next line.
Does it mean a-inoviov as distinct from 6ij/wviov, the money payment ?
Line 36. Tivi. If I am right in bringing the fragments closer
together, there is room for about 7 letters in the gap, i. e. a name of live
letters and p . N3 No, i. e. Thebes.
Line 37. "O is written twice, so that one of them must be part of the
name. nix. The name is improbable, as also H1S13 would be.
Line 38. [py]£' is most likely from the slight traces remaining. It
cannot be ]bpW. The s; may be part of e)D3 or *\bti. We then require
either }bpB> or ptlK. If fi at the end is for p6n, the line should refer
to money and we might restore f][ba W ny]tt>. If it is a measure we may
read v\[b I X py]K>. In either case c£>N, which is unfortunately less likely
than «]D3. I do not feel satisfied about the line. |/j as in 2"' = lh.
Epstein suggests Talm. NVni = HND. //// Fi. The n is not well
formed, but can hardly be anything else. Cf. 1. 41. Epstein suggests pbn .
Line 39. TO[yJ very uncertain. D~lOC*[n] as in 27°, the Egyptian
name of the ' southern province '. XDriD must be a popular word for
'ration' (so Lidzbarski), formed from ns? 27V probably only a
mistake for DVT*.
Line 40. Ungnad reads yblt |B, but cannot explain it. Tl?N = Ass.
alluku ' palace ' is improbable. ~> e^N is the most likely. Then there
are no hundreds, and the other fragment must join on here, the line
reading continuously, but the meaning is obscure.
Line 41. Nn[l3 ] perhaps, as in 2 75, but the 1 is doubtful. A letter is
wanted before it, perhaps b, hardly p. [«|]i>l as in the Behistun text
forefc*. Cf. 3028 f{?\ = 3127 ^K-
Line 42. At the end p is wanted to govern D~lOCTl in 1. 43.
Lines 44-46 are too much broken to be restored. They apparently
state a total for the year — from Mehir in one year to Mehir in the next.
No. 25.
Renunciation of C/aim. 416 b. c.
The papyrus is in an almost perfect state of preservation.
The date, which is given twice, is the 8th (Egyptian 9th) year of
Darius (II) = 416 b. c.
g 2
84 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 25
The document is a deed of renunciation or conveyance, similar to
several others, no. 6, no. 8, no. 13. The parties are connected through
Mibtahiah. Yedoniah b. Hoshaiah was the nephew of Jezaniah, her first
husband (see no. 9), whose house is the matter in dispute. Yedoniah
b. Nathan and Mahseiah are her sons by her third marriage. They have
already appeared in 203 as her sons by Ashor, so that either he bore both
names, or he had changed his name from Ashor to Nathan between
421 and 416. As to the claim of Yedoniah and Mahseiah on the house,
if it was not by purchase or arrangement, it probably came about as
follows : Mibtahiah had no children by her first marriage, since by g7
they would have inherited the property. She was divorced and afterwards
married Ashor-Nathan (see no. 15) about 440 B.C. and her property was
united to his. When Jezaniah died, his house should have gone to his
children by Mibtahiah, but as there were no children and as no provision
was made for that event in no. 9, her two sons by Ashor now claim this
house after her death. On the other hand, since Jezaniah died without
issue, his brother Hoshaiah may have had or thought he had (we do not
know what the law may have been) some title to the property, perhaps
under some provision of the will of their father Uriah, and after Hoshaiah's
death his son would claim. Much of course remains obscure. We do
not know for instance what was the rule of inheritance in case of a
provision becoming void, or in case of intestacy — nor whether real
property passed in a special way.
The following table shows the relations of the people concerned :
Yedoniah
I
Mahseiah Uriah
Yedoniah Gemariah? Mibtahiah = Jezaniah Hoshaiah
1 1
Mahseiah Yedoniah
Zeho
Mibtahiah =p As-hor (Nathan)
I
I I
Mahseiah Yedoniah
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 25 85
Sayce and Cowley, J.
BnnvYi 1 11 ill ill rw ninni? n-> dv in \i ill ill nae bosh M 2 1
3'3 pIN K3^>D
inn Dip NnTa a* »r '»in nnw 13 nwn 13 hw ics* Nnrs 2
N^n an
n'Dno ni3 n*nD3?3 di»n .una jna 13 n^Dnoi jna in n^i^ jid n 3
Dip mT 13
Mioinn an miN 12 nw n*a po Daao npni ien^ [id n N^n an ami 4
n^> pm nnar 12 £>wi n*a r6 iTnnn n^> p3i nms 12 vein n*3 n^y 5
mxi n.i^n in1- n snax n^> l"bb> njno non jn»na pia N^yaoi n»nnna 6
ma« n'ono nb an* n n"Dn» ni3 n*nca» n*a rf? ece 3iyo on^a tota 7
/ 1 1 b rronoi n<aY nax in dd^t i>yaD ja^na MiDinn »f «n»a -jr n^ pm 8
.UK ^naN n^ naianan jnoni »» ph Banna "pa m D^y iy jna "a3 9
^31 nw
D3^> .1131 13^5 neia ^H3J N^DK 3311 pi DSaiJN* ^13N N^ B»N1 .inaNI 10
prna n in it N7V3 ni> jmrn n 13a in d3^> b*w nnax nnxi nx n
, nb jinan
D3eii DDn^i nw nas* jm ^ b«ni nnasi "aa db»3i ■TaT nan »»B»a 12
nnw 13 rwp n ni3i 13 \o idbvvd dbsi *eB*a b»ni .max .1131 *? 13 13
jema n in n^> paam n paa in D3^ b*w nnaxi ni3i isb Jibhi 14
rb lanan
m niB»y jei3 p]D3 n Naiads Dai? jna"1 pi D3b>y »n "jr «ns3 15
P)D3 "> }B>13
{» nt3B» oannx oa^a *n D^y iy oa^r DBNsnui xa^n ^axa I eia^ I1 1 16
Nnnen yem 13 nw 02a pa 13 nniyra ana , pi x^i n-us 13 ;r* n pa 1 7
n^aT1 nnya 13 [i>]na 13 onaro .T'ai* 13 iTono Di^e 13 onao ifn is
D^B'O 13
jna 13 vnx m^wa 13 n^ar n*ana 13 ^na bna 13 n^D^ 19
Endorsement.
nmx 13 n^v n*a ^y yen 13 n^ai^ 3na n pnio isd 20
II ^3 mihn n'-Dnoi jna 13 rt»rtb 21
1 On the 3rd of Chisleu, year 8, that is the 12th day of Thoth, year 9
of Darius the king at that date in Yeb 2 the fortress said Yedoniah b.
Hoshaiah b. Uriah, Aramaean of Yeb the fortress, before Widrang com-
mander of the garrison 3 of Syene, to Yedoniah b. Nathan and Mahseiah
86 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 25
b. Nathan, his brother, their mother being Mibtahiah daughter of Mahseiah
b. Yedoniah, before 4 Widrang commander of the garrison of Syene,
as follows : I withdraw (my claim) against you on the house of Jezaniah b.
Uriah. These are its boundaries : 5 at the upper end, the house of
Hosea b. Uriah adjoins it ; at the lower end of it, the house of Hazul
b. Zechariah adjoins it ; ° at the lower end and above, there are open
windows ; on the east of it, is' the temple of the God Ya'u, and the
highway 7 of the king between them ; on the west of it, the house of
Mibtahiah daughter of Mahseiah, which Mahseiah her father gave her,
8 adjoins it. This house, whose boundaries are described above, is yours,
Yedoniah and Mahseiah both 9 sons of Nathan, for ever, and your
children's after you. To whom you will, you may give it. I shall have
no power, I Yedoniah, or my sons 10 or female or male dependant of
mine, I shall have no power to set in motion suit or process against you,
nor shall we have power to sue son or daughter of yours, u brother or
sister, female or male dependant of yours, or any man to whom you may
sell this house, or to whom you may give it as a gift, 12 on behalf of
myself, Yedoniah, or on behalf of my sons or dependants female or male.
If I, Yedoniah, sue you, or you are sued by 13 a son of mine or daughter
or female or male dependant, on my behalf or on behalf of my sons, (or
anyone) except a son or daughter of Jezaniah b. Uriah, u or (if) they sue
son or daughter, or female or male dependant of yours, or a man to
whom you may sell or to whom you may give as a gift 15 this house,
or whoever shall bring a claim against you, shall pay you a fine of the
sum of ten kerashin, that is 10 kerashin at the rate of 16 2 r to 1 karash
by royal weight, and the house is assured to you for ever and to your sons
after you, failing n any sons of Jezan b. Uriah, without question.
Ma'uziah b. Nathan wrote (this deed) at the direction of Yedoniah b.
Hosea and the witnesses, 18 including Menahem b. Shallum : Mahseiah
b. Yedoniah : Menahem b. Gado/ b. Ba'adiah : Yedoniah b. Meshullam :
19 Yislah b. Gadol : Gadol b. Berechiah : Jezaniah b. Penuliah : Ahio b.
Nathan. (Endorsement.) 20 Deed of renunciation, which Yedoniah
b. Hosea wrote concerning the house of Jezaniah b. Uriah, 21 for Yedoniah
b. Nathan and Mahseiah his brother, both of them.
Line i. The year is given first as 8, then as 9. The second numeral
is certainly 9, for the units are always arranged in threes, so that the
faint trace in the middle is to be read as a unit obscured by a crease in
the papyrus. The Egyptian year began with Thoth, and did not coincide
with the Jewish year beginning with Nisan. This synchronism is
important.
Line 2. anTI as in 2o4-5 (420 B.C.). Here it is the lower court over
which he presides. In no. 20 he sat with the fralarak in the higher
court of Nepha. Note that he was commander in Syene, and held a
court in Yeb. No degelis mentioned, perhaps because the case was taken
before the commander and not before the head of the degel.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 25 87
Line 3. mnN a mistake for VTiriK. DHDN an unusual addition, no
doubt because it was really Mibtahiah's properly. If Ashor-Nathan was
• dead, there would be an additional reason for giving her name as a
further means of identification.
Line 4. ami, &c. repeated by mistake (?). npm lit. 'I withdrew
from you (and) from the house', cf. 622 and often. flW called ]V in 8°
and below, 1. 17.
Line 5. r\"7V ' at the south end ', as elsewhere, see the plan in note
on 5*. Tivn (S-C 7l32n) is now certain, as the name occurs elsewhere.
His father owned the house in 5s.
Line 6. frvna p3. It is difficult to see how there could be 'ancient
lights ' if pm has its usual meaning to ' adjoin '. They must have looked
on to the high road at either end of the frontage. KTI3N as in 1314.
It was the temple, see no. 30. tftbft mK. Cf. Rdvillout, La propriete,
pp. 168, 322, &c.
Line 7. DrV33 a mistake for DPIW3. rb 2JV in no. 8.
Line 8. bym a mistake for N^>y3» as in 1. 6.
Line 9. "p33 a mistake for 03*33.
Line 10. PW nn3Nl, cf. 810-11. The formula differs slightly from that
used in other (and earlier) deeds. The persons are named in a receding
scale of contiguity, and in pairs ; son and daughter, brother and sister
(1. 11), so that nri3K can hardly be ' wife ' (as S-C). She would naturaliy
come after her husband and before the children. The words are again
a pair, and C*N 'husband ' is impossible, as a man is speaking. Translate
therefore ' (any) woman or man depending on me '.
Line n. |l?ni3 * in friendship', not ?0~ as Staerk. pron a mistake
for jurun cf. unsn in 1. 14.
Line 13. JD IDC as in 1. 16. It corresponds to JH7 elsewhere, e.g. in
811, and should mean 'except' as commonly in Syriac. The proviso is
not very clear however. Jezaniah must have been dead by now, perhaps
recently deceased, and hence the action. He cannot have had children
by Mibtahiah, because they would surely have had a prior claim to their
cousin Yedoniah. (This was not the house which Mahseiah gave her in
no. 8.) If he had been divorced from Mibtahiah, that would account for
his being alive at the time of her subsequent marriage (1538 ?), and might
also be a reason for presuming (in law) a doubt whether he had other
issue. In that case the clause would mean 'if any representative of
mine, except my cousin (if any), should sue you '. Yedoniah b. Hoshaiah
then admits the claim of Jezaniah's children (if any), who could not be
liable to a fine for trying to establish it, if they came forward. There
88 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 25
may of course have been a son of Jezaniah who had gone away and not
been heard of.
Line 14. p33 a mistake for "DJ. uron should be pjron.
Line 15. DatST a mistake (?) for D33PY. jrw not jnJN as S-C.
KrWSN as in 2014.
Lines 16, 17. JO "iDty as in 1. 13 'unless any sons of J. come
forward '. Note }P i) }33 indefinite ' any sons ' not jr V2 ' the (known)
sons ' as e. g. in 1. 9 fro *33.
Line 17. iTTiyEi also wrote nos. 18, 20. His father wrote nos. 10, 13.
Line 18. bna '3 Dmo and 1. 19 .Tina '2 h*U as in 207.
Line 19. }ro '2 1TIN brother of the scribe?
No. 26.
Order to Repair a Boat. 412 b. c.
A large sheet of papyrus, extra broad, as befitted its official character.
Lines 17-28 are on the reverse.
It is dated in the 12 th year of Darius (see note on 1. 28)= 412 b. c.
This is one of the most difficult of the texts, partly owing to the broken
condition of 11. 1-6, which makes the precise nature of the orders uncertain,
but still more because of the many technical terms and foreign words of
which the meaning is unknown. It relates to the repairing (not building,
see note on 1. 1) of a Nile-boat used by certain boatmen in Government
employment, and full details are given as to the work to be done on it.
The procedure seems to be as follows : the men in charge of the boat
reported to Mithradates (their foreman ?) through Psamsineith, one of
their number, that the boat was in need of repair. Mithradates reported
to Arsames, who sent an order to Wahprimahi, an Egyptian apparently
holding some local office. This is the purport of 11. 1-3. The order
(11. 3-6) is that whereas a specification of the necessary repairs had been
required (from Psamsineith?) and sent to the Treasury officials, these should
now inspect the boat and do the repairs if necessary. LI. 6-9 state that
they did inspect it, found the specification correct, and that the chief of
the ship's carpenters considered the repairs necessary. The specification
is then recited (11. 10-22), This part is full of technical terms. In
11. 22, 23 Arsames orders Wahprimahi to have the work carried out
accordingly. Much is obscure, but this seems on the whole to make the
text consistent.
All the persons mentioned bear non- Jewish names, except 'Anani 1. 23.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 26 89
Aramaic is thus used in a communication from the Persian governor to
an Egyptian official.
For special treatment of the text see Torczyner in OLZ 191 2, p. 397,
and Holma in Ofversigt af Finska Vetenskaps-Societelcns Forhamilingar
1915, B, no. 5.
Sachau, plates 8 and 9. Ungnad, no. 8.
twiaia nmaai n-aooaa n NnrsD n]Nba nyai '•noynam by duhn ;o 1
[nbc »ia N"ana *l
[n N^naia n»]3Dooa noN p Db Nnaia mnno pbp 2
by na]yob ftibbim mn py na[na]N jaanno n NnrsD noN p N^ana 3
an:?N ob nnbc? put
ibtyoty N^naaona ay ion Niaa n Knanon by nbnt^i Nba[nb]y naan> 4
[it btfwaa nniaai
Nnanoni] pnNi nanan wkpk m, n "pTT nbnt^i nay* nnnaaiNi un[< 5
[Nba «nc«
pJT mbt? narby a.Tby n^by *ao "r pnsi nayn* nn^aiN paybi nw 6
[by annay noN
T3 n ina Nna-aa pnn Nnaia nnnno .T[ana ia]a stiti bapb n sbn 7
... 1 n^DODa
nniaai ibKwb pmn romm Nbanby nraa Nsana n ntibw pnnba 8
[na] iot> Nnaaona
Nan^N naT na[yo]b [nnc]aiN mn py row pi pn^aa &riaa pD »aiaa 9
AnVBDM WDM »T
pno paon ton poa[b] a*^ nntry jon ejo pnn nNi pin *pv nayob 10
mtw ton jaaa laa nnbn
nnbn Naoab jan ?ya^ ion baya pt?p jo[Nb nn] nunam nntry ^ pnni 1 r
in Nnoipb oybp
Nbn nnn *dbm pnn jos-b nn nynyab "-aioona pp jon Nbn *py 12
bnai pro noDo npon
naib anna^bn row* Nba jnpy jon o^on pan naib n« »py pnxo 13
••biy NTaaby jn-ani
jan pnn hn *pp jtrom pnso jma |ypn paoni .-ino fma pay jna 14
nti'on }on nnb pnn
pro nnb p'om nNO pro noao N[b]nb nnbn proa nnbn pro ifi
nrom jyac pnND nnbn
9o ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 26
jon cn: *i jdu rwom pitry nwDjoiK jnoDo ^>3 mistf jy3* *ir6 16
pnxo dpp-iodo pB>y
Reverse.
j-"i3 naa nDDin K^a mtry po nn -1233 pw man *i3i^> n« *pp J7
nso |en3 "pm narurfo mspjf
iw cisn nn^n pro irh K31K3 sja ^y arw n iopy !?y pawn 18
*?y\ jnn jy3x x^yi ntiq
N'::m e|B> ^yi pnn pox NTia ^yi nan nr6n pro irb N3*i«3 d»b> 19
bi?i *rn "jro nnb N3-iN3
13V N-ria ^yi cian nn^n J3t?a nr6 N3-is*3 D"on m x^n '•py ^3yD 20
Nnypn toro ^ry *in
n^y 3rrrv rur wibw d^ nbne* anw Dna n^pno3 nnn33 torn 21
JJD *ai33 "13 10K>
ny3 ayn tw n3 nsy p3y^i it ktu*bd icais pj»j6 prrafi kpm 22
i3y ma no« p dbpn
c[yo] i?y3 nibd ■•jay oyo ct? »?3 pea ipnaioh n nar ^3p^> 23
3n3 3pyi33 .
. . nn b . . ^3 rnwb n . n* . . . . »nonarn 24
. . . . n
(blank) 3n3 $ . , . . Dyo D^ >T3 25
(Demotic) 26
Address. , 3 n DBPK JO 27
[N3^?3 cin]v-n }\ "» nat? n3o[b] vll->3 xnaa 3pyi33 28
1 From Arsames to Wahprimahi : Now the boat of Psamsineith and his
colleagues the boatmen of the fortifications is worn out as reported 2 to us by
Mithradates the boatman as follows : Thus says Psamsini?//^
the boatmen of 3 the fortifications say thus : The boat of which we have
charge, it is time to do its repairs. Thereupon I sent word as follows : Let
the specification 4 be drawn up acrz/rately and sent to the accountants of
the treasury. They with the commanders Shemsillek and his colleagues zxq
to inspect this boat 5 and make a report on it (?), and let the arsenic (?)
which is required (?) by the specification, paint (?) and the rest be sent,
and let the accountants give all the materials 6 and let its repairs be done
immediately, and the rest about which word was sent to them from me.
Thereupon they sent and thus said their messengers : On 7 the beach
which is in front of the fortress, between its fortifications Mithradates the
boatman showed us the boat. We report that by Psamsineith and ,
8 both boatmen of the fortifications, it is described accurately, and we
have reported to Shemsillek and his colleagues the commanders, (and)
Shemau b. 9 Kenufi, head of the carpenters, of SPYT, and they said
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 26 91
thus : It is time to ?>iake its repairs. This is the specification which
[is required (?)] immediately to do its repairs : 10 Cedar and cypress (?)
wood, new, (each) plank 10 cubits 80 cubits by 3 hand-
breadths, among them ribs (?) of 12 cubits; " yards (?) 15, each of
20 cubits; a s'bl, 70 cubits; cabins (?) for the hold (?) 3; a sail (?)
for the mast(?), 1 ; u planks for the hl of 60 cubits; a pht.mini for the
p'r'r, 1 of 2 cubits ; apsi under the hl, 5 ; nails of bronze and iron,
13 200 ; planks of cedar, seasoned (?), strong, tmis, 20 cubits ; the
equivalent of all of it, both sound (?) and broken, he is to bring to the
treasury; sails (?) of u cotton, thick, 180 kerashin ; awnings (?), 250
kerashin ; planks of cedar, new ; 2 hnn, each 5 cubits 15 3 hands by
3 hands; for the hl, nails of bronze, 150, each 3 hands, 275, 16 each
10 finger-breadths; total nails, 425; plates of bronze, 20 cubits; nails
for them, 200; 17 planks of cedar, seasoned (?), Egyptian (?) government,
1 talent 10 minae in all; add (?) sulphur, 10 kerashin, and arsenic for the
painting (?), 100 kerashin ; 18 and they shall add to the planks which
are (?) supplied, to the boards in length each 3 hands clear (?), and to the
breadth and thickness 2 fingers; and to 19 the sim, in length each 3 hands
clear (?), and to the breadth 2 fingers ; and to the planed boards (?) and
hnn in length each 1 hand; and to 20 the s'bl, the wood for the hl, the
rows of tmis, in length each 3 hands clear (?), and to the breadth 1 finger.
The sails (?) of cotton, the awning (?), 21 the arsenic, the sulphur, are to be
supplied by Persian weight. Let word be sent that these materials are
to be delivered to Shemau b. Kenufi, head of ^ the carpenters, of SPYT,
for the purpose of the repair of this boat, and let him do (it) at once,
according to the order issued. Now Arsames says as follows : You are
to act 23 in accordance with this which the accountants say, according to the
order issued. 'Anani, the secretary, drafted the order. Nabu'akab wrote
(it). 21 Wahprimahi 25 according to the order issued .... wrote
... 26 27 From Arsames, which he ....
28 Nabu'akab wrote the document on the 13th of Tebeth, in the 12 th year
of Darius the king ....
Line 1. A curt beginning, as from a great man to a subordinate.
]s*73, Epstein eft. Dan. 616, and reads [dvc] Nv2, but the phrase there is
?2 DK> (not N?a). The lost words must have stated the case. This word
is more probably the verb k?2 'to be worn out', generally used of
clothes and such like, but also applicable to a boat. The boat was in
charge of the N'^ID V NTiSIJ (1. 3), and Psamsineith was one of them
(U. 7, 8). As he makes the report in 1. 2, it is probable that he was
mentioned here. For the name cf. Lieblein, Diet, des noms propres hie'rog.,
no. 121 6. N'ma "J NTIQ1J from 1. 8, where see note.
Line 2. cb must introduce a report of Mithradates : ' M. sent saying,
thus says P.'. It cannot be 'for thus says M., P. . . .' Psamsineith
alone speaks, since "ION is singular, and he does not include himself with
the other boatmen (so that we cannot continue with njruN) because nCK
92 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 26
(1. 3) is in the 3rd person. Hence some phrase must have followed such
as 'the boat service is interrupted, for'. *J OTlBti from 1. 8, is
necessary.
Line 3. N*3"D, see on 1. 8. pDnnD 'having charge of under
Government, not ' owning ', since it was to be repaired by Government.
Elsewhere the word is used of holding land, and perhaps means to hold
on lease, or by a grant, not as freehold. run py is abrupt and strange,
but can only mean ' it is time to '. No doubt a translation of the
Egyptian idiom sp pw, introducing a request &c. n*lK>D1N an unknown
word. From the context it can only mean 'its repairs'. In line 22 the
construct form *itJ>D1K occurs, so that fl" must be the pronominal affix.
It has been assumed that the word is Persian, but no satisfactory
explanation of it as such has been given. I cannot help feeling that it is
connected with the Talmudic "It^DN, the origin of which is also obscure.
[na]yft7 as in 1. 10. The missing words must have stated that Arsames
gave an order (as in I. 4). He is not giving it here, because in 1. 6
(in7CJ>) he says that it was carried out. Hence some such words as here
supplied are necessary. [witJ'N], see on 1. 5.
Line 4. IJJn*. The subject cannot be the boat, which is always
NJ13*BD feminine. Therefore not ' let it be towed ', nor ' let it be
carpentered ' ("i^n"1). Whatever it was, it had to be sent to the Treasury.
They would hardly send the boat bodily. We should expect ' a state-
ment of the cost', and hence I have ventured to supply WIKW in the
sense of ' specification ', taking Turv in the sense of the passive of Hebrew
Tan 'declare', 'state'. N73[n?]y, so Pedes, as in 1. 8, and Epstein,
in the sense of ' (towed) by a rope '. This is unlikely, as noted above.
If vblT\ here and in I. 8 can mean a 'measuring line' (Heb. ?50) lne
phrase would mean 'according to measure', i.e. 'accurately'. Ungnad's
N?2 [D]y 'with care' is unlikely. Nn:n»n, or 'iron. Perles thinks
= ?3"1CN (Targums). It must be one of the many Persian titles, com-
pounded with -kar, 'make', and treated as Aramaic. The meaning
of "ion is unknown. Cf. Nn:nn in Daniel, where the D has been
assimilated (hence '"7»n not '""ittn here), and the second part is -bar,
' bearing ', or the 2 is a corruption of 3 (due to the similarity of
Heb. 12l), and the word is the same as here. In connexion with the
Treasury it must mean the men who do the accounts, ' clerks '. IDf]
begins a new sentence, without a conjunction. N'HSJEID as in 1. 8.
From Persian farman and kar, ' those who make (or give) orders '. The
words supplied are from 1. 8.
Line 5. niT1 (Epstein prv) is probably right. Ungnad priK. The
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 26 93
Haphel of mn, and the Pael (or Haphel with n dropped) are common in
the sense of ' cause to see ', ' show '. The Peal, which should mean
' see ', is not found in BA, but perhaps occurs in these papyri. Here
'inspect'. nmDDIX another unknown word. yyv very uncertain.
The first letter is like a badly made y, the second is obliterated, the rest
is probable (not *]0~ as Ungnad). I have restored it because in 1. 1 7
it occurs, as here, in connexion with PUVWiT. See notes there. fn. »T.
Ungnad nin, but this is doubtful, and gives no sense, unless we could
translate ' which was (mentioned in) the specification. KJ'WN as
in 11. 9, 21 and 3011- Cf. Ezra 53-9. The meaning of the word in all
these places is as uncertain as its origin. In Ezra 53s) the LXX have
Xoprjyia, but in the parallel passage (1 Esdr. 64) <rriyr)v kcu raXXa iravra,
and in verse 10 + iOcptXiovre, which represents the Masoretic tradition
N'l;,N. In 3011 'outfit', 'decoration', 'detail' would be suitable. Here
it seems to mean the description of the outfit, so that I have ventured
to use the word ' specification '. But the meaning of this much-discussed
term is not settled. FHVUfl as in 1 17. No doubt a Persian word,
perhaps compounded with han- = ham-. The 'caulking'? In modern
Persian ^pjjjl means ' to plaster '. ' Painting ' ? Holma compares
Persian Jjj| (Arab. Jjj&) a 'limb', but also a 'fitting together', and
so ' decoration '. Cf. |W in Daniel 25 &c. The addition of pnsi
shows that we have here an enumeration of materials. *? (Ungnad)
following it, is not probable. Torczyner reads pnS2, which he takes
as beginning a new sentence (like inx) 'then', and compares Dan. \>.
[N31B>k] is doubtful. Something is wanted like ' all the materials '.
Line 6. pay? as in 1. 22 and 427,813, in all which places the meaning
'at once', 'speedily' is suitable. In Ahikar 103 p2]} is perhaps a verb,
see note there. *T pnNl, Torczyner ' und nachdem '. HJT by,
Heb. m~7]} ' thereupon ', continues the narrative by explaining that the
preliminary order was carried out by the officials. in?tJ> is therefore
a narrative perfect, not imperative. [p]T seems best to fit the remain-
ing traces of letters. Hence TiDN is probable, and serves to introduce
the 1 st persons in 1. 7. About nine more letters are wanting, which
should contain something to govern N?n in 1. 7.
Line 7. K7n can hardly be anything else. In 1. 1 2 it denotes some
■ part of the boat. The ordinary meaning 'sand' is suitable enough here.
It was outside the town, and must mean the sand on the river-bank,
(('on which the boat was moored. They sent to inspect it. [u]3 looks
more likely than p3 or T3. PP[3n3], doubtful, but there is a trace
of the tail of the second 3. If it is right, "pa will mean the outer
94 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 26
fortifications of the town, running down to the river. *)TQ asyndeton,
as often, especially in official style. The form is Pael, or contracted
Haphel, 'we report'. ... 1. The lower parts of the letters are left,
but I cannot identify the name, which was probably Egyptian.
Line 8. N^13 V NTiSU not 'boatmen of the towns', which would
be pointless. HSU is Persian, ' boatman '. If "7*13 is rightly explained
above as ' fort ', i. e. the outer fortifications of the tfnTO of Syene (but
Epstein thinks ' rafts '), then these men w ere employed by the Govern-
ment to convey things by river from one point of the fortifications to
another, or to bring supplies from elsewhere to the forts. They were
therefore important, as an Army Service Corps, for maintaining com-
munications. In no. 2 (and no. 3) it was Espemet (elsewhere described
as a ' sailor of the difficult waters ') who brought the corn &c. (to Syene ?
by river?) and delivered it to Hosea and his partner, who distributed
it to the garrison. He no doubt belonged to this service. m*M must
refer back to "TJJIV (1. 4), and if the explanation there is right, this will be
a passive participle agreeing with xr^SD, ' it is described '. pnn
'we showed' or 'reported', not as in 1. 7, 'he showed us'. 1Et£>, see
Spiegelberg, Hauswaldt Papyri. "'S'W, Lieblein, op. cit. no. 770.
Line 9. pit's D, explained by Sachau as a derivative of rcsD, with
J assimilated, and the Persian suffix -k, afterwards inflected as Aramaic,
hence 'belonging to ships'. Cf. i033K>1K> in Ezra, 'belonging to Susa'.
But this would require the emphatic form N'GrvSD W1J3, for 'ship's
carpenters'. Epstein suggests that it is formed from the name of the
nome Sape, like p:iD, 67, 31, cf. 33s, 24s3, but in the singular. In his
later article, however, he gives this up, and proposes pro'SD 'your
ship', As W^SD is used so often in this text, it is unlikely that we
should have the form "JVSD (which is not a mistake, cf. 1. 22), and as
the only other use of p" is with a place-name, it is better to take TY'SD
as a place-name. It will then refer to Shemau, ' the chief of the carpenters,
a man of SPYT ', a place otherwise unknown (Egyptian spt = nome).
WifcJ>K Hit. The account of the inspection being finished, this begins
the specification of the repairs as stated by Arsames (i. e. from his office),
down to 1. 22. 'This is what is to be done . . . now (1. 22) do it'.
WSN. The Ass. appitli, 'immediately', naturally suggests itself, cf.
pivb, 11. 6, 22. So Torczyner. (Seidel TPX *)N, meaning?). But the
construction is difficult if mti'SIN has the same meaning as before. II
it could mean ' it is fitting ' (Talm. ntf'SN), then Wijjw would be governed
by taycb, which is not very probable.
Line 10. Here begins the specification as sanctioned by Arsames.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 26 95
IK (or *in) must be some kind of wood. Ungnad suggests Bab. eru,
a kind of cedar (cf. erinu). sp, Bab. tappu, a 'plank '. (Perles says
duppu, ' tablet ', cf. nDDO.) The Coptic Ton is ' keel '. pOl[b]. The
tail of 2 remains. There is room for one letter before it, and only b
is possible. Bab. batku means 'injury', 'broken part', cf. Ezek. 27s--7,
p-Q. If pD2 can be connected with these, DH5> might be 'put', but
in 1. 19 it must be a noun. The 80 cubits 3 hand-breadths must be the
measurement of the broken part (?). The planks were to be 10 cubits
long, and sufficient in number to cover 80 cubits. )12, as often,
'among (them)'. pjD, if it has anything to do with JJD might mean
beams to keep the planks in place, but 12 cubits seems rather long
for ' ribs '. Holma suggests ' rudders '.
Line 11. f]tr would naturally be taken as part of cpc, but in 1. 19
it is a noun. Holma thinks it is NDlpDN 'threshold', then 'yard' of
a ship. IEN[? *inj. There are traces of n and room for b. For
the construction, cf. 28, ... pj?&6 // p2i. ^JJD, not ^3jn (as
Ungnad). Egyptian ? pn. Ungnad quotes Bab. hitinu, part of a ship.
It must be plural here (f?n for pan). In 1. 19 we have N>jjn with the
3 resolved, as in NTDDJ?. Holma proposes 'cabins', and compares
Jonah i5, Krauss. Talm. Archaologie ii, p. 341. But this would be
unsuitable in a specification. You would have to state the materials
required to make them. Egyptian hn means 'rowing' &c, which again
does not suit the context. Ni03, the 'belly' of the boat, i.e. the
' hold '. DJ??p another unknown word. NnDlp the ' upright ', i. e.
the mast ? Ungnad an ' erection '. Holma a ' cabin ' on deck.
Line 12. N?n must be some part of the boat, since something is to
be under it, therefore not as in 1. 7, nor the name of a wood (as Ungnad).
N^n ipy perhaps ' planks for the 'n '. WBttna and "rjnjJD, Egyptian ;
ph is 'deck', and ph is 'hinder part'. *DBN is plural. Holma eft.
Heb. pDSN (Ass. apm, 'rope'), but why construct state?
Line 13. "\2)b as compared with }mn (1. 10) suggests Bab. labiru
'old', i.e. seasoned, but the 1 is difficult. D^n unknown. nrVTV.
Haphel of nnN ' bring '. The subject is ' one ', ' they ', indefinite-
DnnDvn. Pedes eft. Bab. halapu, to 'cover with metal', to 'plate'.
This does not suit the context. Can it mean 'the exchange' of it,
I its equivalent or value? Holma 'what is left over'. Sprengling
I 'calkage', suggesting that it is the origin of calafatare, caifeutrer.
p\an the 'broken pieces'. ^TJ?, the root means to 'spin'. The
phrase should mean ' spun cotton '. It was a very large quantity. Sails ?
i or nets ?
96 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 26
Line 14. jcna apparently the value. }yp"i something spread out,
'awnings'. Holma eft. Heb. yipH 'plating' (or 'awnings'). Cf. 1. 20.
Line 15. N^Jrr} again a part of the boat, as in 1. 12, not a wood.
Line 16. JDD copper-plates for the bottom or other parts of the boat.
Line 17. niCH (or niKH) can only mean 'authority' &c. in Aramaic.
(Holma, 'strong'.) Is j¥0 a mistake for pVD ? The two words might
then conceivably mean 'government of Egypt', i.e. from Egyptian stores.
Holma cites Bab. missu, a kind of wood. '31 "QJD. 1 talent 10 minae
is apparently the cost of materials mentioned so far, to which is to be
added the cost of the sulphur and arsenic. N?3 in apposition to
'31 PS ""pV, ends the clause. riDDin imperative with rr cohortative ? This
suffix, common in Hebrew, does not occur in BA, nor in these papyri (?)
elsewhere. H3D. What was it for? rMFMn, as in 1. 5, is probably
' painting ', for which arsenic would be used. "pIT ' arsenic ' in
Talmud and Syriac, is usually taken as a loan-word from Greek (so
Ungnad), and this has been used as an argument against the authenticity
of these papyri, since a Greek word would hardly be found in Egypt
so early as 412 b.c (The objection is not convincing, since trade with
Greece flourished long before this, and the material was very commonly
used. Cf. "inriD = ord-r^p.) But the reverse is probably the case.
There is no apparent reason why yellow orpiment (auripigmentum) should
be called the ' masculine ' substance, dpcreviKov, in Greek. (First in
Aristotle. Note, not dppeviKov, except by a scribal correction in
Theophrastus.) The Greek is more likely to be due to a popular
etymology of a foreign trade-word. In Arabic it is &&jj- (In a late
Coptic papyrus Mr. Winstedt has pointed out to me n&cc&pnHiy
itA\\&.c&A.p = jJ$\ i-jy-H = 'yellow-arsenic', and n&cc&pitHuj
ukokkoc = ' red arsenic '.) It is not found, I think, in old Egyptian.
In Persian it is 'j.j or, influenced by Arabic, &£jj- From its occurrence
here ^"tf may well be a Persian word from j^ ' gold ', the -n- being
formative (' golden ' substance), and the -k the suffix common later in
Pahlavi. On the other hand, Dr. Langdon quotes Sumerian urudu
za-ri-in = Bab. zarinnu, a colouring (copper-like) substance used to dye
wool. The form zariniku does not occur, but would be correct, with
-k-, as a loan-word from Sumerian. Za-ri-in is found as early as
2500 b.c, and is, he considers, a good Sumerian compound.
Line 18. pDDin"» i.e. something extra is to be allowed on the measure-
ments, ensn should mean ' freed ', ' exempt '. Construction ? The
translation ' clear ', ' fully ' is only a guess.
Line 19. D^ must be a noun here, governed by hv, and similarly
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 26 97
in 1. 10. Meaning? ejcy must have some special meaning, not merely,
'smoothed plank'. Cf. 1. n. N^n a plural from fn. Cf. N^ooy
from ny.
Line 20. »m 'rows', i.e. 'boards'? of 0*011. Holma thinks 'old',
Ass. duru. Nnypl, st. emph. Hence ?yp">, 1. 14, is feminine.
Line 22. p^ seems to be J^Vr- The first ^ may be a mistake.
"t3y n:N is addressed to Wahprimahi, who was to see that the orders
were transmitted to Shemau, and that he carried them out.
Line 23. N'laion. It was therefore the Treasury officials who drew
up the order ending with 'o D^'Va in I. 22. ^:]} was apparently chief
secretary to Arsames. Perhaps the same as in 384,10*11, who was a great
person, since he is not further described. Hardly the same as in 3019 =
3118, nor the father of the scribe in io20 &c. D[yo] ^V^ 'author
of the order '. He drew it up for approval by Arsames, and it was copied
by a clerk. The words Dyo , . , '•Jjy seem to be in a different hand,
therefore a signature. 2J13 2pyU3. If this means that he was the
copying clerk, it is strange, as the hand is again different. Perhaps
it means ' countersigned by N.' as Arnold, Journ. Bib. Lit. 191 2, p. 25.
Hardly the same man as in 2220 (or 1211 ?).
Line 24 is evidently written by Wahprimahi himself. He was an
Egyptian, and wrote Aramaic so badly that no single word, except his
name, is certain. The latter part of the line too is faded. As the letter
was addressed to him, this line and the next must have been added after
receipt.
Line 26, after a blank space, contains remnants of demotic writing.
Sprengling reads Sobk . . . (part of a name) and ban's (so also Spiegel-
berg), which Herodotus says is the Egyptian word for a Nile-boat.
Line 27. Part of the address is lost. After 2 is a stroke which looks
like 3.
Line 28. N"i2D may be 'the scribe', but as 'Anani was so called in
1. 23, perhaps it is ' the document', and nro is to be supplied in 1. 27.
\//->3 Ungnad reads \//mJ>2, and takes "^ for "3, but it is only a badly
made ">. JlTOtr. The units are doubtful. I accept them on
Ungnad's authority, as they may be clearer on the original.
No. 27.
Petition to Arsames {?). About 410 B.C.
This papyrus was first published by Euting in the Mimoires presents
. . . a V Acade'mie des Inscriptions, vol. xi, Paris, 1903. It belongs to the
16'J8 H
98 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 27
Strasbourg Library, for which it was bought in 1898-9 from a dealer at
Luxor. It consists of one strip (not three fragments, as Ungnad says)
63 cm. long by 7-3 broad. The writing on the recto runs lengthwise,
and is divided into two columns. On Euting's facsimile there are slight
traces of another column preceding them, but this is uncertain. The
upper and lower edges are broken, so that the columns are not con-
tinuous. There is writing also on the verso, beginning at the right-hand
end of the strip and runningacro ss it at right angles to that on the recto.
From Euting's facsimile it seems that no line is lost at the top or bottom
of the verso, but all the lines are incomplete at the beginning and end.
The writing on the verso differs in character from that on the recto, but
this may be only because it is written the wrong way of the papyrus — not
necessarily by a different hand. The document refers to events in the
14th year of Darius (II), i. e. 411 b.c, and one may reasonably assume
that it was written in that year or shortly after. In the light of texts dis-
covered since, these events appear to be connected with the troubles
narrated in no. 30, and the papyrus is a (draft of a) letter (to the
satrap Bigvai ? or Arsames ?) complaining of the action ol Trie"
Egyptian priests and the governor Waidrang. There can be no doubt
that "it emanates, like the rest ol these texts, from the Jewish colony
(or garrison) at Elephantine. In the lost beginning the writers
must have stated their case. They then affirm their loyalty, and
instance other illegal acts committed by their enemies, of which they
say evidence can be obtained from the police. In spite of their
good behaviour, their enemies have prevented them from offering
sacrifices to Ya'u, and have plundered (or destroyed) their temple. They
end by petitioning for protection, and that the damage may be made
good. This seems to make the document consistent and intelligible.
Unfortunately a line, or more, is lost at the beginning and therefore also
at the top of column 2. Nothing, however, seems to be lost at the lower
edge, so that the text was originally continuous from 1. 10 to the verso. It
ought not to be difficult to restore the verso, but as we do not know the
original width of the strip, and as the reading of the verso is in parts
uncertain, we cannot determine the length of the lines on the verso. It
is therefore not claimed that the restorations are anything more than
a rough approximation, or that they do more than indicate the connexion
of the text. On the whole, while this petition is clearly connected with
no. 30 and several phrases are common to both, I have placed it
earlier because no. 30 (written in 408) received an answer (no. 32), so
that another petition in these terms would be unnecessary. This may
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 27 99
indeed have been the earlier letter mentioned in 3018. It is strange that
so important an event as the destruction of the temple should not have
been more explicitly described. There may, however, have been another
column, in which it was narrated. At any rate the temple was destroyed
in 411, and this petition cannot have been written except in or after that
year — therefore between 411 and 408. It does not appear to have met
with any success, and in 408 consequently another attempt (no. 30)
was made.
The person addressed is called }Nno, a high title applied to Bigvai in
no. 30. Ungnad suggests that it here denotes Arsames, the governor
of Egypt. The fact that he is named in 1. 2 is not a serious objection.
The use of the 3rd person is merely due to formality.
The facsimile in Euting's original publication is not very legible, but is
helpful in some points. That of Sachau is excellent.
Sachau, plate 75. Ungnad, no. 2a.
)P2V ab jmujD rurus mn «nvo n f[^>]n pa . naroS pn[: ... 1
}n-io »ia nd[^d] mrmn ////■■> rutsa j? ron^s [vb] bzno djtuoi 2
tttrST'
twTva a>3 i[nay t*]ni»N aun n «n»a »» Nnnatjn rut Nata ^y ^rx 3
mp wk n$ larv paji pjoa mn n:n "jnnna n aim Dy nwpn 4'
as irva ny*xJB[3 i]55 nri twi ibhj wnu 3^a n xa^» n ama p 5
Col. 2. rt»a n rnn nx3 wk Nma nrs»3 rm t,t vnw |yai 6
pw run jn na N^n K*ppr£ nnDn n? poi Nmf/a i]aa 7
nrs }n nao i? Nna *\bn awn •»? xnca pnp una *j[t Ni]aa 8
D-iD^n runba poo n N^atna ntisti man jd nayn^ 9
nanaK ftpyfa sj« pdn reruM n nar i>3pi> ?Kn»b [y-i]w 10
Reverse. Tin tmT]3 a^a v KMorb tJ? ^>3nra jo n
Djruo nlS ran mruK j[a 12,
''fpa^ n^>i j]? nancN n!? n[:ra i>ano 13
naiah nn]ao nwn? N»[nea £ 14
wek> n?]« wk non nayoi> [n^yi 15
nT nS 16
n»n nay] nnn pnn« \r\b[ 17
N^a Din]pa^ inpi? Knew [iwssn 18
ao ,
nanr Np]tj>y wat? jNno by |[n nyai 19
H 2
^'
t*
ioo ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 27
NHin''] N^n p namx n[»ay ^ 1 20
rura cya] wwrv an jtn[o ^y |n 21
r&ne* an jn"i]o ^y p rumx [pox n 22
f? T\>]t* »» NnoynjD^ jua[:» ^>n d^ 23
mao]i> wn n jb »t K[nan»i 24
1 . . . we should be injured (?). When (?) detachments of the Egyptians
rebelled, we did not leave our posts, 2 and »0thing disloyal was found in
us. In the 1 4th year of AVng Darius, when our lord Arsames 3 went
away to the king, this is the crime which the priests of the god Khnub
committed in the fortress of Yeb 4 in concert with Waidrang who was
governor here, after giving him money and valuables : there is a part
5 of the king's stores which is in the fortress of Yeb, (this) they wrecked,
and they built a wall in the midst of the fortress of Yeb
6 Now this wall is built in the midst of the fortress. There is a well
which is built 7 withz'w theyftrtress, and it never lacks water to supply the
garrison, so that (?) if it is supervised (?) they would be 8 (able to get)
water to drink m this we//. Those priests of Khnub stopped up this well.
If inquiry 9 be made of the magistrates, officers (and) police who are set
over the province of tstrs 10 it will be made known to your lordship in
accordance with what we say. Moreover we are innocent n of this
damage to the stores which were in the fortress of 'Yeb 12 thus we
are free from blame, and anything 13 harmful of this kind has not been
found in us, but the priests will not allow u us to bring mea\-oJfering
and incense 15 and sacrifice to offer there to Ya'u the God of heaven
16 i7 but they made there a fire (?) 18 and the rest
ofihe fittings they took for themselves, all of it. 19 Now ii it please your
lordship, let the injury be very much remembered 20 which was done to us,
us of the fewish garrison. 21 If it please your lordship let an order
be given according to 22 what we state. If it please your \ordship, let word
be sent 23 that they shall not injure anything which is ours 24 and to build
the altar of ours which they destroyed.
Line 1. A word of three or two letters is lost at the beginning.
\11T\ is clear. On Euting's facsimile there is a very slight trace of 3
before it. If it is part of the verb JA3 the tense is strange, and the usual
sense of PU^a (' striking ' a musical instrument) is unsuitable here. In
1. 23 paa , . seems to be part of the same verb. I suggest that the root
originally had the sense of ' striking ' in general (restricted in Hebrew
usually to striking a musical instrument), and that this could be extended
to mean 'inflicting an injury'. Cf. Ps. 777, TWJJ.'my affliction' I
remember, and try to account for it, (' song ' is pointless). In the titles
of Pss. 4, 6, 54, 55, 61, 67, 76, Hab. 319, nwaaa is perhaps 'concerning
(Or, in) afflictions '. So Job 309 &c, HfrUVU , the object of their injurious
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 27 101
remarks, ' slander '. The word is not found in the cognate languages,
but cf. the kindred roots ITM, JJ33, e|23. ™nJN very doubtful. The
trace of the first letter might be a b, cf. the construction in 1. 23. pa.
There is the down-stroke of a letter before it which may belong to a p or
a 1(?). A conjunction 'when' is wanted. l$]n. The i> is almost
entirely lost. On Euting's facsimile the trace remaining looks more like
y, but >T |j?n pa for 'during the moments when' is hardly possible.
If fi?n is right it would appear that the Egyptians as well as the Jews
were divided into companies.
Line 2. '31 ^arra DJHJD1, cf. Dan. 62i. '31 DCHN |sno 13 as in
30*5.
Line 3. NmatiTl a Persian word.
Line 4. rTOUDH as in 305, a Persian word, probably adverbial ' in
league with ', not a noun governed by nay, as Ungnad seems to take it.
arrm is \\exe fralarak, as in 305, where his son is N7T1 3"l. Hence
fratarak is the higher title. In nos. 204 (420 B.C.) and 252(416 B.C.)
he was only N^Ti a~l, and so must have been promoted in the interval.
VPS seems to cause an unnecessary asyndeton, ' there is a part . . . they
destroyed (it) '. The construction is probably borrowed from Persian,
cf. the Behistun inscr. i. 13 end, d/dd Nisdya ndma . . . avada&m
avdjanam, '(there is) a province N. by name . . . there I killed him',
and very frequently. TVK may therefore be neglected in translation,
like TV which is perhaps derived from it.
Line 5. N311J. Euting and Ungnad Nm\ but * is improbable, and
gives no sense. It was no doubt a store of supplies for the troops. Cf.
WJDninl. 11. [l]aa. Ungnad [njja. But there is hardly room for
n, which has a long side-stroke in this hand. A 1 seems most probable,
but it might possibly be [p]33 ' we built ', to protect the granary, which
would be a meritorious act, and (1. 6) ' the wall is still to be seen '.
Line 6. ilia passive participle masculine. The feminine would be
!V:a . TPX begins a fresh charge.
Line 7. mDn feminine, agreeing with "ixa. P*^n jn T3 is very
difficult. Ungnad takes »n as 'so that'(?). The double conjunction
is strange. At any rate JHJH \n must form a subordinate clause by itself,
since |WT is wanted for the apodosis. Therefore P"»n must express
a verbal idea. The noun H3H occurs in 134, where see note. Here
literally ' if it was measured ', i. e. if it was fairly shared. (Or is 'TJn in
a dittography ?) And
a heap (of them) ', i. e.
Noldeke translates ' eir
eas takes it to mean a 'heap' — 'if (there were)
if they were very numerous — an odd expression^
berufen ', and so Smend. . .^^ Lja^^'
Of
102 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 27
Line 8. [Nl]33 restored from *JT N"D farther on. 1TK Persian, as
tOTKj Dan. 2f'-8, where it is taken as 'statement', 'information'. Here
rather ' verification ', i. e. inquiry.
Line 9. JPHDVI = NTi&n.Dan. 3s-3 ('sheriffs'), and thus confirms the
reading and vocalization there. The exact meaning of the title is
uncertain. NH3^ia a Persian title from gds, 'to hear', gausa, 'ear'.
Cf. to. fSam\i(ji<; wra, Xen. Cyrop. viii. 2, 10, and Hdt. i. 114, 6<f>8a\ixb<;
/JacrtXeo?, the king's informers, police. D1BBTI, cf. 2 439, and Spiegel-
berg in Euting's article.
Line 10. jt^HD. If the sentence continues in 1. n, the meaning will
be 'separated from', and so innocent of. Cf. the use of pTTl in 1411,
and often. Note the frequent use of njnJN, ' they have done all this,
whereas we are innocent '.
Line 11. The verso begins here. fcTODrfl. The PI has a very
unusual form. Cf. WVIJ, 1. 5.
Line 12. ][p]. What Ungnad takes for a 7 is really the tail of the
"J in 1. 11. p5l uncertain. The 3 is short. The word occurs in 216.
[l]S. The traces of N are doubtful.
Line 13. rt[JT3]. The n cannot be the termination of a feminine
noun, which would be subject to ronK>N, masculine. We may restore
i?ano from 1. 2, or B»K3. []b |p3B>] as in 3023.
Line 14. N{im] as in 1. 3. Ungnad NnfvD], which may be right.
[nn]JD. The remains of n are clear, and nruo gives the clue to the
passage. Cf. 3021 for the order.
Line 15. [n^P rb]tt as in 3o27-28, or it might be ttrbbt and some
short word joining on the next line.
Line 16 is hopelessly lost.
Line 1 7. pliDX . Perhaps a compound of Persian afar, ' fire '. The
temple was burned, cf. 3012, but the two statements do not agree exactly,
mn is more probable than Ungnad's ron. It is used merely like the
indefinite article.
Line 18. [rPWl] from 3011. NilCN must be taken in a wide sense.
In 3011 it is the woodwork of the building, which was burned. Here
it must include the sacred vessels, which were stolen. [*&3] is
probable. Not H2y, as Ungnad, which is not wanted here as it is
in 3013.
Line 19. Having finished their statement they now come to their
petition. The frequent repetition of 'if it please your lordship' shows
that the person addressed must have been of exalted rank. For the
phrase cf. Ezra 517, 2D iota by Jfl J$m. JWB> must go with the next
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 27 103
clause, not with 2D. It is adverbial, as in Ahikar 51 &c. [Np]t?y as
in i68-9. But the restoration is only approximate. Ungnad's [njtl'y
is not very convincing. • Think very much ' is a strange expression,
and I doubt if they would use an imperative in this humble petition.
But cf. 3023.
Line 20. Euting and Ungnad read the first letter as y, but it is more
like 1, "1, or 2. ilJIiJN in apposition to f? as in 68 &c.
Line 23. pja[>], cf. note onpjriJ, 1. 1.
No. 28.
Assignment of Slaves. 411 b. c.
Very well preserved. Hardly any letter is really doubtful.
The date is double (as in no. 25), the 13th year in the Jewish
reckoning, the 14th in the Egyptian, of Darius II = 4 12-4 n b. c.
Mibtahiah was dead, recently no doubt, and Mahseiah and Yedoniah,
her two sons by Nathan (= Ashor) now proceed to divide her slaves
between them. There were two lads, brothers, one of whom went to
each of the sons, and their mother and a young child, about whom they
are to make an agreement later, i. e. when the boy is old enough. The
child therefore was not to be separated from his mother before a certain
age, though it does not appear who was to have charge of them in the
meantime. As the slaves bear Egyptian names, it is evident that Jews
could own Egyptian slaves.
The only difficulty in the document is as to the marking on the slaves,
see note on 1. 4.
Sayce and Cowley, K.
Piwn \///-> n:u ninnr6 \ll III III DV in III-' T\W D2&b v///^ 3 1
n[m]i brb jid »t pons \l i>a \ ;ru na .tjt \ jru -13 iTono ion* 2
pintPK ruro« idn^
pbm ixt3o v xp^n rm Km ;en rrnoao »r nnay yby pi>ai mna .3
TfST ros*
sipo nrw p»a nr by nrjp \ *n» nay Nan nos net? ^tdios 4
rata n<DW
Nan nsN n»B> Ni>3 mono ruM,p&n3 *jmbb "r Kpfcn rut N.m .Tnuat^ 5
v nr nay
104 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 28
d^k> rrar nax rpnoaD^roia n*oi« xnpro nn^ap |ty3,nT i?y n-asr 6
n>3* >r j^i Tins "pai D^y "W naT txov jo rP^>na "jKttta >r *jt snsy 7
S>naK n^j jnan /
5>yi T^y neno^ jan »$>n trasi ^ nnsi rux *b mai 12 rpDno na« 8
,»TD«3a n3*ib ya3
in »a3i fronts ruron j6jj Nan lawn pi . p^na *jndd n N*ny hep 9
13^ nma
jri33 nns pi>n3 tnoe *t it N-ny jtdmm nm^y "fry v:t6) i? n-oi 10
spa Nana"3N t.*>
pi j5 T^a joi ia» rams p»rm N3^o n^pn?:3 rnw jena *p« n
IT *T01Dfi 13*1?J1
f|«.H vbi !™n ffW ** l^1 yirix T33 m^nw ii># l&ra thud n 12
Nan wn
nirv p[yj na pby a^aa "W n^> Ht ma Mn,r£N vmsbs n oncN nop 13
, ion a^aa
m^aniaa ana,p i6i,p»3 ana: jaa^a naoi jDnna np^n naai p^»y 14
pNinaa na
hna na onao iaa unrip »mrw rww rpono 033 Nnna m nar NnsD 15
jna na ota w tirw "ia jna inp ••an na jan t» 16
Endorsement.
viinN jna na rprr^ jna na .tdto 3ns ,»-i» Ditaa naj? ja^a nao 17
1 On the 24th of Shebat, year 13, that is the 9th day of Athyr, year 14
of Darius the king in the fortress of Yeb, 2 said Mahseiah b. Nathan (and)
Yedoniah b. Nathan, in all 2, Aramaeans of Syene, of the detachment of
Wan'zath, as follows : We have agreed 3 together and have divided
between us the slaves of Mibtahiah our mother, and note, this is the share
which comes to you as a share — you, Yedoniah — , 4 Petosiri by name,
whose mother is Tebo, a slave. A yod is marked on his arm at the right
of a marking in the Aramaic language, thus, 5 ' Mibtahiah's '. Note also,
this is the share which comes to me as a share — me, Mahseiah — , Belo
by name, whose mother is Tebo, a slave. A yod 6 is marked on his arm
, at the right of a marking in the Aramaic language thus, \ Mibtahiah's '.
You, Yedoniah, are master of Petosiri, 7 this slave, who has come to you
as a share, from this day for ever, and your children after you, and to
whom you will you may give (him). I shall have no power, 8I Mahseiah,
son or daughter of mine, brother or sister of mine, or any dependant of
mine, to move the court against you or against your children in the
matter of Petosiri 9 by name, the slave who has come to you as a share.
If we move the court against you in the matter, we Mahseiah or my
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 38 105
children, or (if) we sue son 10 or daughter of yours or dependant of yours
in the matter of Petosiri this slave who has come to you as a share, then
we will pay to you a fine of standard u money ten kerashin, royal weight,
and we renounce all claim against you and your children as regards this
Petosiri 12 who has come to you as a share. He belongs to you and your
children after you, and to whom you will you may give (him) without
question. Also as to Tebo 13 by name, the mother of these lads, and
Lilu her son, whom we do not yet divide between us, when it is /ime we
will divide them M between us, and we will each take possession of his
share, and we will write a deed of our partition between us, and (there
shall be) no dispute. Nabutukulti b. Nabu-zira-ibni wrote l5 this deed
in the fortress of Yeb at the direction of Mahseiah and Yedoniah his
brother. Witnesses thereto : Menahem b. Gadol ; 16 Witness Hanan b.
Haggai ; Witness Nathan b. Ya'u'or ; Witness Shallum b. Nathan.
(Endorsement.) 17 Deed of assignment of a slave, Petosiri. Written by
Mahseiah b. Nathan for Yedoniah b. Nathan his brother.
Line 2. Mahseiah, named after his grandfather, Mibtahiah's father.
JfiJ = Ashor, see note on 152, and cf. especially 203 with 253. The \ is
not a mark of punctuation, but the cypher ' one ', which may be omitted
in translation. Its use here is derived from the practice of putting it
after names in lists or accounts, for the purpose of adding more easily.
The total in such cases is preceded by 73 . So here, the precise trans-
lation would be 'Mahseiah b. N. (1 man), Yedoniah b. N. (1 man), total
2 men'. Hence no 'and'. n[m]l is probable, though not certain.
The restoration has been questioned because the nP~0 7H occurs in no. 5,
which is sixty years earlier, but as we do not know on what grounds
these names were attached to the degalhi, it is useless to speculate about
possibilities. If the name is that of the commander, this must be another
man of the same name.
Line 4. "•T'DIOQ-, cf. the ostrakon in CIS 138 A. 4. \TV. There
is no doubt as to the reading either here or in 1. 5, but the meaning
is very uncertain. The practice of tattooing slaves is mentioned in
Ostr. M (verso), published by Sayce and Cowley, but why should these
be marked with a yod ? It may be assumed that it was an Aramaic
yod, the smallest letter in the alphabet, not the Phoenician letter, which is
larger. It was therefore not very well suited for a distinguishing mark.
If the letter is meant (i.e. if they really used this name for it at this
time) the only way of translating is as given above (from Clermont-
Ganneau). It cannot be the initial of Yedoniah, because it is also used
on Mahseiah's slave. Whatever it meant, the mark was rvriDSO? \
The \ is again a ' one ', not as S-C. Stenning suggests that it is for
nv, thus changing the mark into '(belonging to) the heir of M.'
106 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 28
Clermont-Ganneau takes it as the initial of some verb (in the future)
meaning to 'annul'. Guillaume proposes 1i"P (improbable) or n"V.
If by any possibility IV could be descriptive of the kind of slave, the
sentence would be simple, ' 1 yod slave, marked &c.' But I see no hope
of explaining it so. TW, a passive participle from a root nJE> (not as
S-C), because of the noun nrpJB\ The meaning ' marked ' (in Ostr. M.
ana) is required by the context, though the root is not found elsewhere.
There is a late Hebrew word ninJK>, for the marks on vessels for
measuring, usually explained as tooth-like marks (from \w), which would
not account for the n. In Assyrian h'ntu is said to mean markings
on animals. HT, properly the arm, or rather the whole limb including
both arm and hand, and so to be taken here. Similarly bil is the whole
limb, leg and foot together. If it was necessary to distinguish the hand
or foot specially, a word like sp was added, cf. NT Da, Dan. 55, and
in mod. Arabic jo ^Jo (Clermont-Ganneau orally). jca must go with
what follows (so Clermont-Ganneau). nrVJS? a katil-form from nJB>.
NipO is ' reading '. We should regard it from the other point of view
as ' writing '.
Line 8. p'H must be 'judges'. Usually p*i, which may mean either
'judge', or 'law-suit'. &>JN only here and in 1. 10. Usually B*K.
Line 9. W*l, similarly ' the judge '. N^y adverbially for ' about
him'.
Line 10. N31V2N (or WT) as in 2014, 2515.
Line 11. Pp"W P|M probably = the usual t&tntlW? II 1 as the standard.
'» r\bpr\K2 = the usual rD 1J3N3. p*l }». The O is almost certain.
It is dependent on ffirn by a confusion of two constructions, ' we with-
draw from you as regards litigation ', and ' we withdraw from litigation as
regards you '.
Line 12. m a loose parallel to "j^. It should be T32^1. TVN,
cf. 27*, where also it is not required by the construction.
Line 13. nj? = Heb. my. pry, cf. on 263.
Line 16. TiNirp more probably than TlNirP (as S-C). A variant of
mix. Cf. i2, niNnrp (fem.).
No. 29.
Contract for a Loan. About 409 b. c.
Fragments only.
The date is between the 1 5th and 1 9th years of Darius II, probably
the 1 6th year, i.e. 409 b. c.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 29 107
It relates to a debt, part of the price of a house (?), due from the son
of Hosea to Yislah. The text is too much broken for restoration, and
perhaps the pieces are not correctly put together. Hence the details are
uncertain. It resembles no. 35 in some respects.
Sachau, plate 15. Ungnad, no. 15.
[-a jnj -ien] ndt3 3*3 Kate wwi[i /]// ///-» nap yniwo m[*3 I
n *q-ik ywn
-id[j6 ] brb pd n otk bna nn [p6]d^ mana ^a-6 po 2
^y T^ ww
p >bv [iin n .]// /// pj»a nn[ nynns* £p"' in ^]"i3 H03 3
epa nvp
rut nbd3 ii> [d^x |n]j ru« i»k 5^[y ]5o fta ,,»i 4
pafo Bnw[Ti I /// ///->] rut? Dana m» . . •. . . ni iy nyms nn tm 5
p nan* r\zh[w xi? ny]ms* i^pt? in ena n:r nsd3 [m n[« k]ftv pa 6
N30 • , 7
1 In the month of Mesore, year 16 (?) of Darius the king, in Yeb the
fortress said Nathan (?) b. Hosea, Aramaean of '- Syene, of the detachment
of Nabukudurri, to Yislah b. Gadol, Aramaean of Syene, of the detach-
ment of as follows : There is to your credit against me 3 the sum
of one kaw^, four shekels the balance (?) of 5 (?) minae which were due
from me as part of the amount 4 of the value of the house (?) of
M I Nathan declare that I will pay you this sum,
5 one karash, four, by the month of Pahons, year 77 of Darius the
king 6 and if I do not pay (and) give you this sum of one karash
four shekels 7 . . . .
The end is lost. It probably contained provisions similar to those in
No. 11.
Line 1. /// ///"» T\2&. Five strokes certainly. Judging from the space
required for the name n^D*1 in 1. 2, there were probably six. [fro] is
supplied from jj'n]J 1. 4. A nwin '3 nWwas a party to no. 25, when
Yislah b. Gadol was a witness, in 416 B.C.
Line 2. *T1313J as in 352 and also in 73 (461 B.C.). Cf. note on 28s.
^>y *li> TVK ' you have a claim against me for ', cf. 35s.
Line 3. '31 "in ^3 restored from 1. 6. nn[ ]. Sachau suggests
nn[nD] from 354, but that would require a numeral after it. pjD3
must be ' minae ', but 3 is strange. Ji¥p as in 3s4. Sachau takes it as
' total ', and so Ungnad, who eft. Neh. 770— but nspo there means • a part '.
In 2 74 }D nvp must mean 'part of, as in other Aramaic. Apparently
(Nathan) b. Hosea had bought a house with another person, and part
io8 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 29
(1 karash 4 shekels) of his share (5 minae) of the price was still owing to
the vendor Yislah b. Gadol.
Line 4. rva. The n and letters after it are very uncertain. 6b[v]
uncertain. Possibly the lower fragments here are not in place, and this
may account for the long tail of "I in ION. [jn]a . There is a trace of
n, and of D in D^PK. Cf. 354.
Line 5. njn-iK in '3 . No doubt J^pB> was omitted by accident, but it
may have been the popular usage ' 1 karash 4 '. ny as in 3s6 denotes
the time limit. Then ... "13 ought to denote the day of the month, or
some such detail. The letters are clear. [ ]TV&. The number is
quite uncertain — 17?
Line 6. [n]ht p3 'within this month' ? It is so difficult that I think
the fragment must be out of place. rorv, no 1 as one would expect,
cf- 357-
Line 7. . . . wo , . If the fragment is out of place these letters do
not belong here.
No. 30.
Petition to the Governor of Judaea. 408 b. c.
This is in many ways the most important text of the series.
It is a fine papyrus, with 11. 1-17 on the recto and 11. 18-30 on the verso.
It is in excellent condition, hardly a letter being really doubtful, and
although there are some difficulties, the meaning is as a rule clear. The
date (1. 30) is the 17 th year of Darius II = 408 b. c.
It is a (draft or copy of a) letter from Yedoniah, who thus appears to
be the chief priest (see below) and head of the community at Yeb, to
Bigvai the Persian viceroy of Judaea. It describes a plot (to which
alldsion has already been made in no. 27) between the Egyptians and
the Persian governor Waidrang for the destruction of the temple, which
took place three years before the date of writing. Incidentally the temple
is described, and some historical facts are mentioned. Finally Bigvai is
asked to give orders for its re-building. Cf. no. 27.
The larger questions raised by this document have been discussed in
the general introduction. It is only necessary here to say something of
the persons with whom this letter is concerned. (See Sachau, p. 4 + ,
and Ed. Meyer, Papyrusfund, p. 70 + ).
On the form of the name MU3, see/fiAS 1920, p. 179. It is only
a variant (and later form) of i)i2 (Neh. 77, &c), which is Graecized as
Baywas. (The persons are of course not the same.) Josephus (Ant. xi, 7)
mentions together a viceroy Bagoses and a High Priest 'lwdwrjs at about
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 30 109
this date, and we are forced to conclude that they are the same persons as
the Vnja and pnV of this letter. It is true that his account lacks pre-
cision, and that his materials for the history of the period seem to have
been scanty. He could no longer draw upon Nehemiah. Since Bigvai
was viceroy in 408, it is evident that Nehemiah was either dead or
superseded by him at that date. Hence the ' two and thirtieth year of
Artaxerxes' (Neh. 136) must refer to Artaxerxes I and be the year
433 b.c. We thus obtain a fixed point in the history of Nehemiah.
The Bagoses of Josephus has generally been identified with the minister
Bagoas under Artaxerxes III (358-337), mentioned by Diodorus Siculus
(xvi, 47). But the name was common, and since Bigvai here was in
office in 408, the two persons cannot be identical. Josephus describes
his Bagoses as 6 o-Tparrj-yos tov 'Apragepgov, which of course might refer
to any one of the three kings of that name. A various reading is tov
d\Xov 'A. Whether or not that can mean ' alterius Artaxerxis ' ' the
2nd A.' is not of great importance. It is evident that if Bagoses-Bigvai
was governor of Judaea in 408, under Darius II, the only Artaxerxes
under whom he can have served was Artaxerxes II (404-358). What is
meant precisely by o-TpaT^yos is not so clear. After being governor of
Judaea under Darius II, he may have gone on active service under
Artaxerxes II, but it is not impossible that Josephus confused him with
the Bagoas who was a military commander under Artaxerxes III, and
hence described him as crrpaTTjyos. He was capable of such things.
Bigvai was therefore a successor (immediate ?) of Nehemiah as "lirp nns .
The Johanan who was contemporary with him as High Priest, is
mentioned in the list in Neh. 122223, a later addition to the book, hardly
due to Nehemiah himself. Of this Johanan ('Iwaj/vi/s) we have a short
account in Josephus (Ant. xi, 7). He was on no good terms with Bagoas,
who intended to turn him out of office and install his brother Jeshua in
his stead. In consequence Johanan killed Jeshua in the Temple. It
would appear from Josephus that this took place in the reign of Artaxerxes,
and therefore some years after the date of this letter. If, however,
Johanan and Bigvai were already on bad terms, we can understand why
Johanan is not associated with Bigvai in the answer to the letter (no. 32).
Moreover Bigvai would see no objection to the existence of the temple at
Elephantine, while Johanan would officially condemn it.
The mention of Sanballat (1. 29) is more difficult. Nehemiah speaks
of him (for no doubt he is the same person) frequently as a bitter
opponent. Cf. especially Neh. 333-3*. Though he does not give him
the title of |»1DB' nnD (as here) it is evident that Sanballat was in some
no ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 30
sort of authority in Samaria, and there is no reason why he should not
have been still in office in 408. This is implied by the expression ' sons
of S. governor of S.'. If he had been dead the phrase would have been
' sons of S. who was (formerly) governor of S.' (nin 'DS5> DPID ''l), as
Sachau remarks. So far this letter is not inconsistent with Nehemiah.
Again, according to Neh. 1328 a son of Joiada, i. e. a brother of Johanan,
had married a daughter of Sanballat, and had apparently been expelled
from Jerusalem. This also is not inconsistent with other facts. Now
if we turn to Josephus we find that he diverges from Nehemiah, and
seems to have telescoped the history. He says that Sanballat was sent
to Samaria by Darius, which might be correct if he meant Darius II.
But he definitely calls him 'Darius the last king' (Ant. xi, 7, 2
TeXevraiov, not 'former'). He thus confuses Darius II with Darius III.
and puts the events nearly 100 years too late. Then he makes the
daughter of Sanballat marry Manasseh, a brother of Jaddua (and there-
fore a son, not a brother, of Johanan) and brings him into relation with
Alexander the Great after the defeat of Darius III at the battle of Issus
(333 B.C.). It has always been difficult to reconcile Josephus' narrative
with other facts. If Sanballat was governor of Samaria in 408, and had
grown-up sons then, he must have been at least 40 years old, and it is
hardly possible that he should have lived 76 years longer — for Josephus
makes him die in 332 (Ant. xi, 8, 4). The view that there were two
Sanballats, each governor of Samaria and each with a daughter who
married a brother of a High Priest at Jerusalem, is a solution too des-
perate to be entertained. We are therefore forced to conclude that
while Nehemiah's contemporary account is consistent with other historical
facts, Josephus has gone astray by confusing the two kings Darius and
the two officials Bigvai, and then has filled in his history largely by
imagination. Events may have happened somewhat as he says, but not
when he says, and the result does not give us a high opinion of his trust-
worthiness as an historian.
The fact that the Jews of Elephantine applied also to Delaiah and
Shelemiah at Samaria and mention this to the authorities at Jerusalem,
shows that (at any rate as far as they knew) no religious schism had as
yet taken place. Both names occur in Nehemiah, and it is not impossible
that they denote the same persons as here. They are not said here to be
resident at Samaria, and they may have been at Jerusalem in- the time of
Nehemiah, but of this there is no evidence. After the building of the
temple at Shechem it would probably have been impossible.
Yedoniah, who sends the letter, is clearly the head of the community.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 30 11 1
Sachau thinks he was not a priest because of the phrase (1. 1) ' Y. and
his assessors the priests '. To me the phrase seems to imply exactly the
contrary, as if it were ' Y. and the other priests with him ', i. e. &0_f13 is in
apposition to both rTOT and PUTI33. It is not ' Y. and the priests his
assessors '. He is no doubt the same as Yedoniah b. Gemariah in 22121,
since the money there subscribed for the temple would most naturally be
paid to the representative of the congregation, and as it was for the use
of the temple, he would probably be the head priest. Moreover we have
no evidence in these documents that the colony was under an ethnarch
(as Sachau), appointed either by themselves or by the government. Nor
is it likely. They brought their actions at law before the fraiarak, or
more directly (as soldiers) before the N7VD1 , in all civil matters. On the
other hand for religious purposes they had priests, and must have had
a chief priest, who would be the natural representative of the religious
community when acting together as such. The present petition is treated
as a religious matter, and Yedoniah therefore has charge of it. The priests
his assessors formed with him what would have been in later times the
p JV3 or ecclesiastical court.
A question which naturally presents itself is, why, if this letter was sent
to Jerusalem, was it found in the ruins of Elephantine 2314 years after-
wards ? The answer seems to be that it was not the letter actually sent,
but either a draft or a copy. The former is suggested by the large
number of corrections (words inserted above the line, and erasures) and
by the appearance of the writing, which is hasty and uncouth, much
more so than in most of the other documents. Indeed if the style were
not so straightforward and the words so familiar, one would often be in
doubt as to the reading. No. 31 is another draft, differing only in detail,
but fragmentary, and it is probable that no. 27 is a draft of an earlier
petition. No. 31 helps in the elucidation of no. 30, and also shows that
the scribe was not very accurate. We may well suppose that the serious
step of appealing to the governor of Jerusalem, over the head of
Arsames, was not taken without careful consideration, and that a copy
(or the corrected draft) of the letter would be kept as a record.
Incidentally the letter seems to show that. Bigvai was superior in rank to
Arsames, or that they approached him as having more sympathy with
the Jews.
Sachau, plate 1, 2. Ungnad, no. 1.
tb& wn_ m n kwb nrnsiyi rprp *p3j; mm nn_ ■>ma3 jhio bit 1
N3^D wm _np *]__*_* jonnh pjj ^33 kw bgh ™v nba jmo 2
" T
I v •?•'*■
n t •«. f,-..^ /_._._. _0_.*X«a. »f_»Mi. Sfe/o.&uj-l- £>ie_#uu_t
ii2 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 30
*in Tien mm i? jnr pnx pm «^>x nn jya n p ■m«.nn*a »aai 3
py ^aa
xai?D pim*"Vi l///-» nap non rrw pcx p rmusi mam "pay jya 4
a-^<- n jjvn oy maicn xnma 3^3 n awn n xn»a xa?o by pixi ddj *
**•*»**+"«• run nma
"~T? aarm nnx mon jo viym xnma a»a >r xni?x 1m n xmax ni? mn 6
«it-»«-ra^ v xmax noxb wn»a pD3 mn ^nan n nna paa ^y n^ n-u« x^ 7 '
ombn oy 3^ nm3? mx pnnx x^n oy xnxo ~m paa nnx ima< xnm3 8,t
mn
*T: *
- p]x nan non wi 1 xaax n wnoyi xynx ny viibhj t,? xmax3 w>y 9
., }ynn mn
onn«n itjp Dn*Bm lana t.t xmaxa wi *r px »i nWra Ma \/ '/// px 1 10
non n pnxTxanpx nn^ ny »i x^a nx jnpy &ddi pna n^« nhb>bh *i n*
xmaxa mn n xnaynaoi cjddi xanr n N'pnroi , lant? nK,N3 *^a nin i2r"
___ — — x. , ^np^ xb m
nai xnma 3^3 m xmax ua prnx p-jvo ita *dv pi nay ain^s:^ 13
■web i>y »ti3J3
*jr xmaxa ayna» ts»xi nao b p-ra» snfo maxi rom\ naa m xmax 14
5>an xi>
wfc p^i pQijn pvi jjjQt, pp.^ pM1 pp; Dy nanaN T3y n3r:3 na lg
k»db> xno
n3x mp n pDaa bai \mi?:n p xba lpsan xn^a'ir aaiTn pnn n 16
xn Aj«7t »
^X3 xr n pya nar n»np b|n oina prm i^pp b *]r xmax^ cxa iya ♦? 17
n^n^a n xwna nmaai xan xana pnw f>yi jxno p^ nnax 1^ n>ay 18
cf>f#Y«**'t mnx pbTx ^yi ini~*
\///-> nw nen nm p ?]x pby in^ x^ mn nnax imro nm wjy *» 1"^
xa^tt ennnn ^^
x^> nK»n pay ni>»nxa j^r x^a jnsnn |Kab fppp nanax nop njryi 20
p^^'o-«^^«^^,>,*
nnao xa!?o t^mnn \//////-> nap m* nyi »a? jo p|N pn^ x^ nom 21
mi?yi n[j]iah
nnx p 3^ ^y3 i?a xmn^i nniaai n»JT fiay ?ya-iT
niaxa my x^ 22
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 30 113
*bv2 nn rwapb }^ [pap k^d n33»|j it kiuk ^>y ncynx 3D jxno ^>y p 23
sr£x i.t v ktijn ^y mrvi?y n?nt^ "po max p-woa mn Tomi inau 24
paip Nni^yi xrma^i annoi pmp mn ruq n bipb Nmsa aHa rraacb 25
N'-nm pm pwi rcrtitc py baa T^y ^^i "pea Nr£x trp n Nnaio !>y 26
ni>N in> Dip i? nyw npivi wan* T ntun* n'ny nay p jn run n $>a 27
anr ^yi.^l pafa epa »D*iafpi fnan m^y nba^ n naj jr> nw 28
ror ^y
dntno "3a n^tpi n^i ^>y ;nta mn nniKa k^o N^>a e|N pnvi jn^c 29
n
\/// ///-> rw nvniD? 3 a jrr n? dbhk p Tay n n:?a ^s* 30
■ ■
1 To our lord Bigvai, governor of Judaea, your servants Yedoniah and
his colleagues, the priests who are in Yeb the fortress. The health 2 of
your lordship may the God of Heaven seek after exceedingly at all times,
and give you favour before Darius the king 3 and the princes of the palace
more than now a thousand times, and may he grant you long life, and
may you be happy and prosperous at all times. 4 Now your servant
Yedoniah and his colleagues depose as follows : In the month of Tammuz
in the 14th year of Darius the king, when Arsames 5 departed and went
to the king, the priests of the god Khnub, who is in the fortress of Yeb,
(were) in league with Waidrang who was governor here, G saying : The
temple of Ya'u the God, which is in the fortress of Yeb let them remove
from there. Then that Waidrang, 7 the reprobate, sent a letter to his son
Nephayan who was commander of the garrison in the fortress of Syene
saving : The temple which is jn Yeb 8 the fortress let them destroy.
Then Nephayan led out the Egyptians with the other forces* C They
came to the fortress of Yeb with their weapons, ° they entered that
temple, they destroyed it to the ground,. and the pillars of stone which
were |here they broke. Also it happened, 5 gate-ways 10 of stone, built
with hewn blocks of stone, which were in that temple they destroyed, and
their doors they lifted off (?), and the hinges n of those doors were bronze,
and the roof of cedar wood, all of it with the rest of the furniture and
other things which were there, 12 all of it they burnt with fire, and the
basons of gold and silver and everything that was in that temple, all of it,
they took 13 and made their own.) Already in the days of the king.r
of Egypt our fathers had built that temple in the fortress of Yeb, and
when Cambyses came into Egypt u he found that temple built, and the
temples of the gods of Egypt all of the??i they overthrew, but no one did
any harm to that temple. 15 When this was done, we with our wives and
our children put on sack-cloth and fasted and prayed to Ya'u the Lord
of Heaven, 16 who let us see (our desire) upon that Waidrang. The dogs
tore off the anklet from his legs, and all the riches he had gained were
2639 1
ii4 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 30
destroyed, and all the men 17 who had sought to do evil to that temple,
all of them, were killed and we saw (our desire) upon them. Also before
this, at the lime when this evil 18 was done to us, we sent a letter to your
lordship and to Johanan the high priest and his colleagues the priests who
are in Jerusalem, and to Ostanes the brother 19 of 'Anani, and the nobles
of the Jews. They have not sent any letter to us. Also since the month
of Tammuz in the 14th year of Darius the king 20 till this day we wear
sack-cloth and fast. Our wives are made widow-like, we do not anoint
ourselves with oil 21 and we drink no wine. Also from that (time) till
(the present) day in the 1 7th year of Darius the king, neither meal-
offering, incense, nor sacrifice 22 do they offer in that temple. Now your
servants Yedoniah and his colleagues and the Jews, all of them inhabitants
of Yeb, say as follows : 23 If it seem good to your lordship, take thought
for that temple to build (it), since they do not allow us to build it. Look
upon your 24 well-wishers and friends who are here in Egypt, (and) let a
letter be sent from you to them concerning the temple of the God Ya'u
25 to build it in the fortress of Yeb as it was built before, and they shall
offer the meal-offering and incense and sacrifice 2C on the altar of the God
Ya'u on your behalf, and we will pray for you at all times, we, our wives,
our children, and the Jews, 27 all who are here, if they do so that that
temple be re-built, and it shall be a merit to you before Ya'u the God of
28 Heaven more than a man who offers to him sacrifice and burnt-
offerings worth as much as the sum of a thousand talents. As to gold,
about this 29 we have sent (and) given instructions. Also the whole
matter we have set forth in a letter in our name to Delaiah and Shelemiah
the sons of Sanballat governor of Samaria. 30 Also of all this which
was done to us Arsames knew nothing. On the 20th of Marheshwan
the 17th year of Darius the king.
Line 1. There are traces of a line above, which has been washed off.
JX1D is the highest title (under the king) used in these texts. Tirp nns
does not occur in the O.T., but mi.T nna in Hag. r1, &c, and NHirP nna
in Ezra 67. Tirf = Judaea commonly in Daniel.
Line 2. h\8B* '& r6x, cf. on 171. N"W rbti often in Ezra and
Nehemiah.
Line 3. NrV2 "03 are the people of the palace, the king's entourage,
which had so much influence with him. eji?N "in, cf. njntJ> in Dan. 319.
TH^I mn as in 622. Mn the imperative is awkward.
Line 4. There is an erasure (one letter) after pDN. pSJ DBHK V3 as
in 2 72,3. It was evidently an important event and his absence may have
given the opportunity for this attack. He seems to have been back in
Egypt when no. 32 was written.
Line 5. K*1M, cf. 273. Correctly used as in the O.T. for priests of
a foreign god. JTOIDn as in 27*, which combines the readings of this
passage and 315. Here, as in 27*, it must be an adverb, and a verb is
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 30 115
wanted, which was probably forgotten by the writer because the sentence
was long. It would be quite in order if he had written n»K instead of
D^ in 1. 6. In 315 the word is not used, and the construction is simple.
Line 6. vu?.T with indefinite subject, ' let them destroy '. "inN a mere
conjunction ' then ' or ' so '.
Line 7. Xt6 has been much discussed. It seems to be a term of
reproach, and a participle from nr6 a root frequent in these texts.
Cf. e.g. Ahikar 138 where r\nb ")2i is a man who does not honour his
parents, and 1. 139 TVilb 'my misfortune'. In the inscription of Nerab
i10 nnb niD is a ' miserable death ' (or the ' death of a wicked man '). It
is difficult to find a word to cover all the uses. Here it seems to be
almost parenthetical, ' this W. (the villain) ' as the later Jews would add
1»B> nty. It is strange that it should be used in a formal document,
and even stranger in the answer (32s), where there was not the same
excuse for strong feeling. A title would be more in place, but the
suggestion that it is for NTt6 ' tabellarius ' is impossible. psa Nepayan
(Sachau) must have succeeded his father as N^n31 after 416. His head-
quarters were at Syene, whereas the fratarak was in Yeb (run 1. 5).
N~ii:x a very important building 'the temple in Y.', but 317 adds liT 7
Nr6s .
Line 8. H5H^ corresponds to nyn1' in 1. 6. It occurs in 27s-24 and in
31 and 32. Probably = Heb. tW»3. p~inx plural, agrees in sense
with NTTi, if there is no scribal error. DHvn Sachau eft. Gen. 27s
(LXX (f}aperpa, Onk. 'sword'). It does not occur elsewhere. No. 318
has Dri^T, and the meaning of both must be ' weapons ' in a very general
sense.
Line 9. Note the asyndeta, common in Aramaic, but perhaps also
used here for greater vividness. nin Sachau takes this as introducing
the sentence, like Hebrew \T"i, and this is no doubt simplest. But cf.
the use of 'JVK 27*, &c, which is perhaps similar. Jinn are ' gate^
ways' of solid stone.
Line 10. pj3 may be a participle, but more probably the noun ' a
construction of. dTptn 'doors' as in Targum. In 1. 1 1 N^CKH.
10*p so Hoonacker (p. 41, note e). Sachau \typ, but | always has a pro-
jection at the top. The 1 is carelessly written. The expression is
strange 'they stood the doors up', i.e. leaned them against the wall to
burn them, or ' lifted ' them off their hinges ? Barth's suggestion JD'P
' wood' is impossible. A confusion of D with D would be easy in some
later kinds of square Hebrew, but is impossible in this writing. Moreover
as py is used in the next line, a different word would hardly be used here,
1 2
u6 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 30
especially as it does not occur elsewhere in these texts. Finally ND*P
means rough, unworked wood, sticks, &c, quite unsuitable in this context.
Line 11. N'WI (an erasure of one letter before it). The singular
must have dagesh (N&'l) which is resolved in the plural, as in N^DOy and
(1. 15) fppC. tSTU, the material in apposition to DrPTX as probably
pa in 1. 10. ~;npy, so Sachau, as in 3110, an impossible form.
Ungnad eft. |nBB> (= matt, but nnQtf 221) pas* (= nns), but these are
feminine forms, whereas py is masculine, with plural jpy (fcTpy, &c.). The
J looks like a mere blot here, and may have been erroneously copied in
ii10. n i6l. The *T is not wanted, or fttn non is omitted. pnNI.
Torczyner ' und zuletzt alles was dort war ', but it is more probably used
loosely for ' other (things) * the rest '.
Line 12. *|D31 a mistake for NSD31. Nn»J?n3» 'anything', i.e.
everything. N^3 note the repetition (3 times in 2 lines) to emphasize
the completeness of the destruction.
Line 13. }E> 'beginning from' i.e. already in. *p» a mistake for
O^D (so 3ii!^-— pniN a strange form, but confirmed by 3113. We
lihouldexpect jnmN . pTX»i> . The p is added above the line because
there was not room. Cf. 11. 12, 17, 18, &c. Cambyses came into
Egypt in 525.
Line 14. rOSWl as in 3113. A final n was written and erased. STUNS
is the complement to bin ' did harm to this temple ' and DJTUO is adverbial
' in anything ' — not ' harmed anything in this temple '.
Line 15. T3J? as in 3114, not my as Sachau and Ungnad. pt3*X a
mistake for \W£? So 1. 20. tfDE> XTO as Dan. 523.
Line 16. pinn Haphel (in 3i15 Win Pael) 'caused us to see', Heb.
13Snn, of seeing vengeance inflicted on an enemy. Cf. ptn 1. 17.
'31 N'-n^a a very difficult phrase, ipSHil is 'took out', which Hoonacker
explains as an inversion ' they took out the chains from his feet ' for ' his
feet from the chains', cf. Heb. n^a. With «rrbft the meaning of k!?33
must be a ring worn as an ornament, though its later meaning is usually
' fetter'. No. 3115 TTli'33. It has been proposed to take sa^S as ' dog-
like ', a term of abtlfee applied to Waidrang, which is improbable. The
phrase has not yet been satisfactorily explained.
Line 17. bl. 3116 N^3. NT feminine as in 213.
Line 18. Toy ought to be fern. See on 11. 24, 27. .VUX as in
1. 19 for the usual max, a loan-word from Bab. egiriu. (But cf. ayyapos,
from Persian.) It is a secondary form developed in Aramaic when the
consciousness of its origin was beginning to be lost. Cf. perhaps run for
run in io23. The letter may have been no. 27. Then JNTO there is
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 30 117
Bigvai. |N10, cf. 3117. by is omitted by mistake. in6TK is con-
firmed by 3 118.
Line 19. "Oil? an important person, since Ostanes is described as his
brother, not as son of any one. He seems to be settled at Jerusalem,
and therefore is hardly the same as the secretary Anani in 2623. Whether
he is the Anani of 1 Chron. 324 there is nothing to show. Wll, and
in 1. 21, probably only a mistake for BHriVTl 3i19-
Line 20. HJTyi corrected by a *i above the line, suggests that in popular
pronunciation the *i was assimilated to the T. Cf. "D~iy 45;5 for '"\ by and
Dan. 414 ma*ny (Epstein). ntan&O one would expect the plural.
PTQy. A mistake for the feminine (due to the masc. form of N^J?).
JVTEip. The ' is blotted. If it is1 to be read, it is a mistake for ;n^O
as 3i20-
Line 21. ">3T is certain, but must be a mistake. It is the form used in
addressing a female, and in any case "JT ]D could not mean ' from that
time'. In 3120, NJiy "]T \D. "iyi. Note the y, which shows how the
tail developed. DV iy\ very awkward. Either we want *? fUT N»V *W
(Ungnad), or perhaps W iyi. nibyi (= Heb. r6iy) does not occur in
BA, but may be inferred from the plural ])by (sing. Nfi^y later) which
is found in Ezra as well as nnjD.
Line 22. Tiny. The 1 is probable though the lower parts of the
letters are effaced. The passage is defective also in 3121. We should
expect pay. N'HlrV used like ijiOB* in late Hebrew for an ordinary
member of the community who is not a ;na or a Dan. ?a, in 3122 N?a.
p~)CN. The p is blundered. 3 1 22 pCN correctly. It is a participle.
Line 23. njac6 probably a mistake for mac^. }p2B>. The subject
is ' the Egyptians '. ' They do not leave us alone to build it ', i. e. do
not allow us. '•in is confirmed by 3123. Not an interjection (as
Ungnad), but 'look upon your friends', parallel to NTIJX by n^yns*.
Cf. e.g. "W flip, Ps. 2518-19.
Line 24. rbr\W should be fern. Cf. iTIiT 1. 27. Ungnad compares
the old Babylonian usage.
Line 25. NnrttDI a mistake for NnmDI. imp"1 is written over an
erasure of a word beginning with n~. 3125 yp2. 'They will offer'
(future) not ' let them offer ', jussive, which would be "\y\p\
Line 26. There is a spot of ink after 1.V, which one is tempted to
take for the beginning of a n, but it is more likely to be a false start
for ttrbtt. With yby r6w cf. Ezra 610 (Jampel).
Line 27. bl in 3126 again N^D. nay perhaps a mistake for may
'si ita feceris'. In 3126 nayn 'si ita fades '. n ly 'until', i.e. so
n8 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 30
that. nplXI not 1 of the apodosis, as Ungnad. The //-clause goes
•with what precedes, and this begins a new sentence. np"i¥, a righteous
or meritorious act (because conferring a benefit). One wonders what
Bigvai understood by it. Cf. Deut. 2413.
Line 28. JO, as first shown by Bruston, is comparative, 'more than',
but the sentence is clumsy in spite of Sachau's illustrations. '•013 fC"l
'in value like the value of is surely a mistake, and JET should be
omitted, as in 3127. Fpl = t\btt as in 3127, and often. '31 2n] bjrt.
Epstein makes ?]} a noun meaning a large amount, and eft. Nfivy,
e.g. in Baba B. 133b, but the meaning there is uncertain, and there
is no evidence for ?]} in that sense. Also 3127 omits 1 which makes it
impossible. Clearly the reference is to the bakhshish, which they would
of course expect to pay, but about which it would be polite to write
as little as possible. That Bigvai was not above such considerations
we see from Jos. Ant. xi, 7, 1, where he is said to have exacted
50 shekels for every lamb sacrificed. This seems to have been after the
murder of Jeshua, and therefore after the date of this letter, so that
there can hardly be an allusion to it here. The mention of the value of
the sacrifices however is strange.
Line 29. |jmn \rv& probably asyndeton, 'we have sent, we have
made known ', and fjx begins a new sentence. Hoonacker translates
' nous avons instruit notre envoys '. This would be excellent, but
'messenger' would certainly be nvtJ*. It may be a mistake for that.
The parallel passage in no. 31 is lost. Cf. Ezra 414 (Jampel). HvT
n^DPCJ'l. Both names occur in Nehemiah (610, 133), but there is no
evidence for identifying the persons, nor for assuming that these lived
at Jerusalem. A Delaiah occurs (once only) in the Samaritan list of
High Priests, possibly about this date. (See Cowley, Samaritan Liturgy,
p. xx, note 1.) L^ns'JD, in Nehemiah D^2JD. Cf. 3nNn:D = jnmo.
The name is Babylonian, though his sons' names are Jewish. nns
= a-arpaTrrjs, the title used by Josephus. He is never called so by
Nehemiah. p-iCJ? as in Ezra 410,17, where it is the name of the city or
district (Heb. p^Et?), and so probably here. The Samaritans still use
piEE* as a gentilic name for themselves (Heb. D^nci").
Line 30. N?3 in ^o21 comes before »T, better. p Tny as in 1. 18,
'done to us'. J?T b& D£HX because he was away at the time (II. 4, 5).
They do not wish to accuse him to his superior. It might be dangerous.
"3 3 though not certain, is probable.
The many mistakes, solecisms and corrections in this text, and the
frequent Hebraisms here and elsewhere, give the impression that the
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 30 119
writer was not really at home with Aramaic as a means of expressing
himself. Although no Hebrew document is found in this collection,
it is not impossible that these Jews commonly spoke Hebrew among
themselves. They would be compelled to use Aramaic in business
transactions, as the language of the Government, and as long as com-
position was confined to legal documents, with their familiar set phrases,
they could manage it well enough. But they came to regard it as the
natural vehicle for literary expression, letters, &c, and when they went
outside the legal formulae, the task was beyond their powers. They
no doubt understood it, since they had Ahikar and the Behistun in-
scription in Aramaic translations (not made by the Jews of Yeb). It
may have been necessary to use Aramaic in writing to Bigvai, and of
course Johanan would be quite familiar with it.
The question of the use of the two languages by the Jews is of some
importance, though the conclusions reached by Naville do not seem
to be justified.
No. 31.
A Duplicate of No. 30. Same date.
A fragment of a duplicate of no. 30, perhaps copied from it.
It has been torn lengthwise down the middle, so that the ends of all
the lines are missing. The writing, though not, good, is better than that
of no. 30, and it has fewer mistakes. In some places it helps to elucidate
no. 30. The lines have not been completed in the transcript here, since
that would be merely repeating the other copy.
LI. 27-29 are on the verso.
The date is the same as that of no. 30, viz. 408 b. c.
Sachau, plate 3. Ungnad, no. 3.
(W]na n[nuai rwp "pay iw nnQ \nua jni]d ba 1
] wwi[i mp T3]d[vJ pnrb py Soa W[» n*bb>] t6x 2
] rwT *i[n]ay nys py baa sin nn^i mm •£ jib* pn* 3
] Kabra [by] ^tni pas amtt na Nab» Pimm \///-> rw 4
n]b ran ran n xanma u-mb ia.T pDaji «pa otto 5
<Jr nna f[»a]3 by nre> nna« nt6 it anTi ncn p ttyra 6
n»]-«d nai -jr p&a nrw lana* otto a^a n «nb« *m n 7
wa]N »i Mrnojn win ny \m«ru *jr otuk3 iby wn»j» 8
i2o ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 31
] it xn[ia]x:i nn *r px n rboB pas // /// pnm pynn 9
nn*]B» ny rue »! jnpp xba it xmax bbooi btb ibx 10
]xn»y[na»]i xson »n xnnT n tfpiTBl i-nt? xn^xs n
] 3*3 IT Xniax U3 pPQX p»D "abo DV JE1 H3y 1 2
nynjao iwo [nao N]b[s] tcnus [\jnfcic maw rwn nas it 13
po*]* pin ftjab fppB> pa3i pea ny nanax n*sy 14
b]si vviban jo viibaa ipaan xnba -p jrma win -15
] sjn Dim pTrn ib'op xba it xmaxb 65*6*3 nys 16
] pnvT by [ej]N jk-io by jr6e> [. ,]5w nar by max ;b 17
] mn [nn]ax iw nm yay n vnnN ttidix byi 18
QppB' nanax xw nar nyi xabn E'lnvnn v///-» nap 19
na]f nyi x[an]y it }[» t|n] pnsj> xb noni jnc>» xb nco 20
] jya it xniaxs nay xb mbyi nanb nruo 21
n^yn]x so |[x]n» by jn pox p s* *bys xba snim 22
] nan »r T'onni nriso »bys nn rr^ob jb jpsp 23
] bspb xmn 3*3 msob xnbx in* n xmax by 24
nb]vai tec?3 xnbx im *i xnsno by snpa xnibyi 25
na3]rp it xmax ny n nnyn p ;n nan »r xba unvw 26
] by 5)bx paaa ejD3 von jrom niby nb snp* n nsa p x^op 27
*a]3 n^b^i n^bn by jnbt? |ȣ>3 nnn nnax x^o 28
\///] ///-? nap pspmob 3 3 yn* xb dbhk p msy n xba 29
1 To our lord Bigvai, governor of Judaea, your servants Yedoniah and
his colleagues the priests . . . 2 God of Heaven seek after at all times.
May he give you favour before Dar'vxs . . . 3 May he grant you long life.
and may you be happy and prosperous at all times. Now your servant
Yedoniah . . . 4 Year 14 of Darius the king, when Arsames departed
and went to the king . . . r' The fortress. They gave money and
valuables to Waidrang the governor who was here, saying . . . 6 let
them remove from there. Then that Waidrang, the reprobate, sent
a letter to his son Nephaya.n, who ... 7 of Ya'u the God, which is in the
fortress of Yeb, let them destroy. Then that Nephayan led out the
Egyptz'rtwj . . . 8 their weapons. They went into that temple. They
destroyed it to the ground, and the pillars of stone . . . 9 5 great gate-
ways, built of hewn stone, which were in that temple . . . 10 those, of
bronze, and the roof of that temple, all of it, of cedar wood, with the
rest . . . n they burnt with fire, and the basons of gold and of silver and
mrything . . . 12 they made. Already in the day of the kings of Egypt
our fathers had built that temple in Yeb ... 13 He found that built, and
the temples of the god,*- of the Egyptians all of them they overthrew, but
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 31 121
no one did any . . . u was done, we with our wives and our children
have been wearing sack-cloth, fasting . . . 15 let us see (our desire) on
that Waidrang. The dogs tore oft' his anklets from his legs and a// . . .
16 sought to do evil to that temple, all of them, were killed and we saw
(our desire) upon them. Also ... n to us, we sent a letter about this
... to your lordship and to Johanan . . . 18 and to Ostanes the brother
of 'Anani, and the nobles of Judaea. A \etter . . . 19 Year 14 of King
Darius till this day we wear s&ck.-cloih . . . 20 we do not anoint ourselves
with oil and we drink no wine. Also from that lime till this . . . 21 meal-
offering, incense nor sacrifice do they offer in that temple. Now . . .
22 and the Jews all of them, citizens of Yeb, say as follows: If it seem
good to your lord^ip, lake thought . . . 23 allow us to build it. Look
upon your well-wishers and friends who are here . . . 24 concerning the
temple of the God Ya'u to build it in the fortress of Yeb as . . . 20 and
the sacrifice we will offer on the altar of the God Ya'u on your behalf,
and we will pray . . . 20 and all the Jews who are here, if you do so that
that temple be re-built . . . 27 Heaven, more than a man who offers to
him sacrifice and burnt-offerings worth the sum of a thousand talents.
As to ... 28 matter, we have sent a letter in our name to Delaiah and
Shelemiah the sons of ... 29 all that was done to us Arsames knew
nothing. On the 20th of Marheshwan the 17th year . . .
Line 2. |crn7. No 1 before it. The text must have been shorter
than in 303, probably omitting e]7N in |J?3 T }D TJV .
Line 5. The word n^lDH (305) is not used here, and the sentence
is simpler.
Line 8. DimT = DiT7n (308) of which it shows the meaning.
Line 9. pill. 3010 has px *J which is not wanted, since it occurs
just afterwards, and is probably a mistake. H7D3. In 3010 n7*DE
is more correct.
Line 10. jnpy is quite clear here. Copied from 3011 in error? The
unnecessary s? before Dy is omitted.
Line n, end. »? is probable. Sachau 7, but the mark is too low,
and is unintentional.
Line 12. DV. In 3013 better "W. "370 is better than -|7D 3013.
Line 13. There is room for K73 which would be right.
Line 15. Nnn Pael = pnn 3o1G. After K"Q7:d the next word begins
on a slightly different level, which looks as though the writer was
conscious of beginning a new clause. If so N"Q73 must qualify what
went before. Cf. note on 3o1G.
Line 16. nj?3 shows that ~\2i 73 preceded — a mistake, since the
sentence goes on with a plural. 3016 correctly p2J and )]}2.
Line 17. , . 7B> perhaps }n7B> repeated by mistake, but it looks more
like 137 tf.
122 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 31
Line 18. DTP Judaea, in 3019 NniiT.
Line 19. WWfl correctly. 3019 Cinm, which thus seems to be a
mere mistake.
Line 20. jnBTD correctly, for the doubtful pn^D in 3020. Wiy "]t
better than *3T 3021. At the end a trace of T probably. H3T is better
than DV 3021.
Line 21. nay is not more certain here than in 3022.
Line 22. pEK correctly. 3022 pDN is a mistake.
Line 25. 31p3, in 3025 pl^.
Line 26. p ;n. There seems to be a slight additional space before
this, as though it began a new sentence. 12])T\ is better than nay
3027. iy n a mistake for »f iy.
Line 27. "'DT more correctly than 3028.
Line 28. rpJN = TH8HQ 3029. Perhaps the construction was different,
e. g. ' concerning all this we sent a letter '.
Line 29. t&2 better here than as in 3030. "3 2 is certain here.
No. 32.
Answer to No. 30. About 408 b. c.
Complete, but carelessly written. The lines vary, in length and are
irregularly spaced.
This is the answer to the petition in 30, 31. Though not dated, we
may assume that it was brought back by the messenger in 408.
Apparently the answer was given verbally and this is a note of it made
by the messenger. The first three lines are crowded together and parts
of them look as though written at a different time from the rest. Judging
from this impression, one would say that the text originally began
with 1. 2 :
pnvna i? w nb pa?
rbm n anno rva ^y
i. e. with the actual message. Then the writer felt that something was
wanted to show from whom the message came, and he added 1. 1 with a
thicker pen, and the words projecting at the end of 1. 2 and beginning of
1. 3. This would account for the repetition of pDT, which is otherwise
unnecessary. The report is not a formal answer, for no titles are given to
Bigvai and Delaiah, and it is not addressed to any one. It is not com-
posed by a skilled scribe, for the contents are ill-balanced : 11. 5-7 are
unnecessarily full, and the really important part, rather clumsily ex-
pressed, occupies only 11. 8-1 1.
tUj, t^-O^J /v. ~J9 i
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 32 123
Sachau, plate 4. Ungnad, no. 3.
noN rtfyv\ *maa n pa? i
rba »l xnmo ivapj) DtnNDlp 3
ma Nn*va a-a »? anx> 4
♦naaa dip jonp p mn 5
tru *ir wnb j:iti <t 6
Nata Bwn \///-> ruca
jonp^ mn na mnsa rrjar^
^y imp ttnnabi Knro»i 9
pyipb n bipb it Nnai» 10
nayriQ mn n
1 Memorandum from Bigvai and Delaiah. They said 2 to me : Let .
it be an instruction to you in Egypt to say 3 to Arsames about the altar-
house of the God of 4 Heaven, which was built in the fortress of Yeb
5 formerly, before Cambyses, 6 which Waidrang, that reprobate, destroyed
7 in the 14th year of Darius the king, 8 to rebuild it in its place as it
was before, 9 and they may offer the meal-offering and incense upon
""to that altar as formerly n was done. <n'*127
\s
Line 1. p3r 'a record' (cf. Ezra 62) or perhaps a 'thing to be
remembered ', as it seems to have meant in 1. 2 if that was the original
beginning. The "T is 'of, not 'which'. That would be "6 IIDN n
'ai Mi;a.
Line 2. ^ is by the thicker pen, projects beyond the line, and is
smudged as though something were erased. u? here only a
strengthening particle, as in Ahikar 2, 13, 20 &c, not 'saying'. W
the jussive form, ' let it be a thing to be remembered, to say ', i. e.
remember to say. "M2tk> no doubt for "idnd^, for which more
commonly *yovb. Something has been erased, and the unusual form
is perhaps due to his having originally written Dip D?. Then he erased
Dip and wrote "\D. He probably intended to write *|EN?.
Line 3. D5JHN Dip project into the margin, and were clearly added
later. There are traces of ?]) under D^(l«). The order is to be given
to Arsames, who thus appears to have had no power (or will) to build
the temple on his own authority. He must also have been inferior
in rank to Bigvai. One would have expected something more formal
than this rather off-hand verbal instruction. xnaiD JT2. It is not
clear why he uses this expression instead of N"i13X. Epstein takes it
i <<•->
124 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 32
as ' house of sacrifice '. After nbx he had begun to write R*DP and
then erased it.
Line 5. \EHp JO ' from of old ', i. c. long ago.
Line 6. NTi? as in 3017, an odd word to use in a document of this
kind, but all the passage (11. 5-7) seems unnecessary. Between this
line and the next there is extra space, but nothing is missing.
Line 8. mao?. The construction, depending on noo^, is very loose.
He had apparently forgotten what his main verb was.
Line 9. Note that Nrr6y is omitted— no doubt intentionally. It is
generally supposed that the animal sacrifices had offended the Egyptians,
and that this was sufficient to make Bigvai discountenance them, apart
from any view which the priests at Jerusalem might hold, and with
which Bigvai might or might not sympathize. But as Ed. Meyer points
out {Papyrusfund, p. 88), the Egyptians did themselves sacrifice certain
animals, and he thinks that the prohibition was due to the Zoroastrian
view that fire was profaned by contact with dead bodies. jnip*1 i. e.
so that they may offer. The word is written over an erasure. Perhaps
the passive was originally written. It was a longer word, since a J is
visible at the end.
Line 11. "J3j?no. I have translated 'done' for want of a better term.
It is really a cult-word, 12]} meaning to perform a religious act.
No. 33.
A further Petition, connected with No. 30.
About 407 b. c.
Much injured on the left-hand side, and the ends of the last four lines
entirely lost.
It is a letter from five prominent men of the colony at Yeb, relating to
the rebuilding of the temple, and may therefore be dated at about the
same time as nos. 30-32. Like them, it is no doubt a draft, or a copy
kept for reference, since there is no address or signature. The writing
is excellent, and certainly not by the same hand as no. 32, as Sachau says.
The mention of the bakhshish in 11. 13, 14 suggests that it was sent to
Bigvai (cf. 3028), who is denoted by JSIO in 11. 7, 12, 13, but it is quite
possible that they had to bribe more than one official. This may have
been a private letter sent (3DT ?]} 3°28) with no. 30, or it may have been
sent after receipt of the answer (no. 32) as Ed. Meyer thinks. Un-
fortunately the broken lines at the end do not show very clearly what
they want to say about the question of the sacrifices.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 33 125
Sachau, plate 4. Ungnad, no. 4.
I r\vc [ith»]j na rtw "pay 1
[I] nap jn: -12 myo 2
I n»B> Mn 13 rvy»e> 3
I top Din- na ytm 4
\l III pa: b I nop pro in ytnn 5
p[Dn]n[o] xn-va T3 n pane 6
j5[m\] ;xna |n pes4 p 7
naarv jb]»T xn^s in» *t K"Mto 8
mn n[M }o]np na Nrrva a-a 9
non inyrv n[J>] £po ny nin pi 10
. . . -]DJ1] nn:c n:ia^ \rb 11
-ins nj^y n]ay dhw fsn»i 12
sjki .... spja |nio rva ^y in53 13
fifix pmx pyp 14
1 Your servants Yedoniah b. Gemariah by name, 1. 2 Ma'uzi b.
Nathan by name, 1. 3 Shemaiah b. Haggai by name, 1. 4 Hosea
b. Yathom by name, 1. 5 Hosea b. Nathun by name, 1 : total 5 men,
6 Syenians who >fold property in the fortress of Yeb, 7 say as follows : If
your lordship is favourable 8 and the temple of Ya'u the God which we
/iad(?) be rebuilt (?) 9 in the fortress of Yeb as it was formerly built,
10 and sheep, oxen (and) goats are not offered as burnt-sacrifice there,
11 but incense, meal-offering and drink-offer ing only, 12 and (if) your
lord?hip givw orders to that effect, then 13 we will pay to your lordship's
house the sum of ... . and also 14 a thousand ardabs of barley.
Line 1. [1T"id]3. There is a trace of O. This is no doubt the same
Yedoniah as in 22121 and 301. Cf. the names in 34 \
Line 2. TiyE = rwyo 183, 201G.
Line 6. pa:iD a Persian formation from pD, declined as Aramaic.
They belonged to Syene, i. e. to degalin stationed there, but held
property in Elephantine. p[on]n[DJ is very probable.
Line 7. j£[n"V]. The |tt is probable. Some word of this kind is
wanted after JS1D \T\, cf. 2719 &c. On the form cf. JpatAX Ahikar 82 (not
' pity us ').
Line 8. [naarv J^Jn perhaps. Epstein's proposal T\yiTf K*OK« 1 is too
long, and the phrase is always N">»0 rbtt not rV "T Nr6s\
Line 9. n[:a] is right, and [|»]np is necessary. The stroke before
mn belongs to the line above, therefore not miT.
126 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. ^
Line 10. fpl. The 1 means 'on the understanding that '. "lin )p.
At first sight one would take these as ' birds and dove '. (So Rondi who
compares the use of }p in Mishna.) But as T3J? is added fp is probably
for fNy = JNS, and "lin is 'ox'. )\>pO. The form is strange (from
Vnbp). It is no doubt borrowed from Bab. makluiju), 'burnt-sacrifice'.
Line n. Animal sacrifice was not to be offered, whether out of con-
sideration for Persian or Egyptian feeling, but incense and meal-offerings
were unobjectionable. PinJD , without 1 , may imply a third term — perhaps
"]D3 'drink-offering' (but cf. 1. io). There is a trace possibly of the "],
and of another word.
Line 1 2 seems to be still part of the long protasis, introduced by p in
1. 7, 'and if you give orders accordingly'. CHIN not a name (as
Ungnad), which would not fit in. Ed. Meyer proposes Persian avadaesa,
which he translates ' information '. It must be something of the kind,
an official term for ' edict '. It is quite uncertain how much is lost at
the end of the line, but something (nriN* or njnJX) is wanted to introduce
the apodosis in 1. 13.
Line 13. Ungnad reads JJ13, but that is only used in the future, and
the 3 is never assimilated. The strange character at the beginning is
really M, rendered illegible by the crack in the papyrus. [n0]3
probably. The amount is quite lost. At the end ejNl is wanted as
there is no conjunction with pjjfc? (1. 14).
No. 34.
A Letter. Probably about 407 b. c.
Fragment of the end of a letter.
Though little can be made out consecutively, it certainly relates to some
violence done to Yedoniah and his colleagues, some of whom are the
same as in no. 33. As no mention is made of this in the preceding
texts, the fragment would seem to be later than those. The statement
that houses were entered and goods taken, indicates a renewal of the
pogrom described in no. 30. It is perhaps not too rash to conclude that
it took place after the receipt of Bigvai's answer (no. 32) and was due to
some action taken by the Jews in the way of preparations for the re-
building of the temple. The date would then be in or soon after
407 b.c. There is no evidence to show that the temple ever was
re-built, and the series of documents stops very soon after this, as far as
we can judge. Egypt was getting into a very unsettled state, and
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 34 127
apparently threw off the Persian yoke in or about 404 b. c. (cf. no. 35).
It may well be that the Egyptians took the opportunity of the prevailing
unrest to get rid of the Jewish garrison, and began by making away with
(or killing ?) the chief men of the colony.
The writing is unskilful. Perhaps it is not an official document but
a private letter. It may have been sent from some other place, e. g.
Thebes, to Yeb.
Sachau, plate 15. Ungnad, no. 16.
BTD 1
ironip]N n n^'j nnsp rot sn own 2
nns bbsi ymn nnx iwidm nin nn« no-i }td[n nnnsi x:n Nam 3
[ ] R»jn n^D11
W3 taaa ironm n wtm rin»2> ten nnnx x^5 d&hd mn r*5S 4
in vm vnm vin Din: in yEnn dijv in ycnn nnoa -a hot 5
[ rpDJno
nn jn^ anno ^y nx inns )npb n tfDMl a»a |na i^y n nto 6
tvrb& ny T^i liva d^ mn jni> w ny n^ cyu my "^ +» / fans 7
1> 2 khnum, now these are the names of the women
who were found 3 at the gate in Thebes (?) and were taken prisoners :
Rami, wife of Hodav, Asirshuth, wife of Hosea, Pelul, wife of Yislah,
Re'ia 4 Zebia, daughter of Meshullam, Yekhola her sister. These
are the names of the men who were found at the gate in Thebes (?) and
were taken prisoners: 5 Yedonia b. Gemariah, Hosea b. Yathom, Hosea
b. Nathum, Haggai his brother, Ahio b. Mahseiah (?). T/iey have leftQ)
0 the houses which they had entered in Yeb, and the property which
they had taken they have restored indeed to the owners of it, but they
mentioned (?) to his lordship the sum of1 120 kerashin. Moreover they
will have no further authority here. Peace be to your house and your
children till the gods let us see (our desire) upon them.
Line 1. Only the lower parts of a few letters remain, which cannot be
re-constructed.
Line 2. D13n. The marks preceding it may be DB. The name
Petehnum occurs in 23". riiTDK> njT as in 221. [irDHB'jK and the
beginning of 1. 3 may be perhaps so restored from 1. 4.
Line 3. }"Vd[n] is more probable than to assume a name )TD
(Ungnad). ''en a short form of iWl, a^W.n of rTOlfl. nWiCN
128 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 34
compounded with Osiris. Hosea had married an Egyptian. ?1^Q cf.
Line 4. x*SS very doubtful. Cf. *3¥. Dbt'O. There is very little
space for b, but we can hardly read anything else. vbly doubtful.
Ungnad &6'p« Sachau xhl3. X32 'in No', i.e. Thebes? So
Epstein, but he afterwards suggests it is for M33, and thinks it is the
gate in the wall mentioned in 270, but the word is too common to serve
as a clue. Why were they found in (or at) the gate anywhere ? 22
no doubt means here the 'gateway' which served as a court of justice,
and may also have contained a prison (cf. e. g. Ahikar 23). But it is not
evident what had happened to them. [l]"innx, as Epstein, for nnxnx,
is possible. Cf. nooi? 322, i>2D2 2435. Sachau [injinnx 'were killed'.
Arnold [isjirinx ' were insulted '.
Line 5. The same persons as in 331,4-5. D1D3 for pro, influenced
by Din* just before. [rVDjnD very doubtful. The second letter is
unrecognizable. After the name a word is wanted to govern X'n2 in
I. 6, e. g. ' they left ' or ' they made good '.
Line 6. |rQ )b]} 'T. Sachau 'which they entered with them', i.e.
into which they brought them (the women). This is impossible, for "6y
requires 2 before the place entered (cf. e. g. 309). He takes }ro as being
necessarily the feminine pronoun. The only possible translation is ' the
houses into which they entered', and |i"Q must be = BA ["litS, masc.
(cf. |i"U» 164) as Dill = D1i"Q. It is strange that both forms should occur
in the same text, but the change from 0 to }, which prevailed in all
branches of Aramaic, must have begun at some time. This letter shows
signs of being written informally, which might account for what was
perhaps at first a vulgarism. That the distinction between final D and |
was not very clearly marked at this date is illustrated by Din3 for Jinj
in 1. 5. The D (in the pronoun) was however the earlier, and not merely
due to Hebrew influence, since it is found at Senjirli (e. g. Bar-rekub,
II. 18, 19). In 8211 |n2 is perhaps masculine. The feminine does not
occur, I think, in these texts. 12nx can only be Aphel of 2in, although
an Aphel is not found elsewhere in these texts. (Ithpe'el for Hithp.
does occur). Perhaps it is another instance of a late form in this letter.
DX not as in Hebrew (as Ungnad). Others take it as a mistake for Dn,
which would be simplest. The reading is certain, and, if right, may be
the same as the DX in 1311. If so, it is probably a distinct particle,
and not, as explained there, a mistake for DSX. DiTlD for DiTXID =
DiT?y2 'the owners of them'. H3*l not 112*1 (as Ungnad). Epstein
eft. >^> J> j = ' rem tribuit ', and so ' paid ', but I do not know this meaning.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 34 129
It is strange to have *1 instead of 'r, cf. p3T 321-2, »yQP Ahikar 53, but
also 13T 'male' i517-20 *dt &c. The sense is quite obscure — 'reminded?
. . . N"i»$>. The restoration DiT" is possible, but the two spellings so
near together are unlikely. Possibly |S~ID^, another case of bribing the
governor. ['pD] is wanted before JBH3, 1. 7.
Line 7. '31 "ny is very difficult. The clause seems to end with run ,
the succeeding words being the final salutation. The 1]} after N"> is for
"liy (written fully when it stands alone) and i'r6 (like JH3 1. 6) is ' to them '.
DytO properly ' edict ' or ' order '. Here ' authority ' ? ' power to act ' ?
[x]5jlin* Pael or syncopated Haphel, cf,. pnn 30lG. The suffix should be
J, but there is a slight trace of N, perhaps another approach to the forms
of BA; cf. 3 115 Win.
This is the end of the letter, as the rest of the papyrus is blank.
No. 35.
Contract for a Loan. About 400 b. c.
Very much broken. The largest fragment, containing the beginning,
can be fairly well restored. The small fragments cannot be put together.
The text must have been long, since the small pieces mention other
matters besides the debt of 2 shekels. They must belong to the latter
part of the document, after a gap.
Before 11. 1, 3, 5, 10 a thick line is drawn half across the page. The
meaning of this is not evident.
This is the latest of the dated documents, if (as no doubt is the case)
Amyrtaeus is the man who rebelled against Persia shortly before 400 b. c.
There was indeed an earlier Amyrtaeus who rebelled under Artaxerxes I,
but he only succeeded in establishing himself temporarily in the north,
and there are perhaps other indications of the later date (see notes). The
later Amyrtaeus cannot have been reigning as early as 408 (at least in
Yeb) since we have documents of that year dated in the reign of Darius.
Ungnad is therefore probably right in putting the 5th year at about
400 b. c.
This seems to be a case arising out of a marriage settlement, and the
parties appear to have been husband and wife — perhaps divorced. The
man owes the woman 2 shekels, which he promises to pay by a certain
date. The large fragment seems to end with the customary promise not
to make further claims, but the formulae must have differed from those
used elsewhere. Hence some of the restoration is uncertain.
259 9 K
130 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 35
Sachau, plate 34. Ungnad, no. 37.
px sata d^iicn* ///// nap einn[jos^] /^a 1
maiaa ^n^> xma a^ n nriN mfbtp] "in [onao] ion 2
//p *pa ^y *ab wk mb rn[o]D ma [,-in]^d^ 3
-IDD^J? T N<D331 NDD3 n*p f» /'"WinD ej[D3] Ml 4
ny »afy»ijB>Ki ruaroK omo n:x -aniroK 5
«[b jn] xabo d^u-iJion // /// nac 'nonab -»"^ 6
[/■•J-innD [in] // }S>p[t?] tot nbd3 *a? nan^i [nopiy] 7
DJn[s^ /]a no[oi] avia ?y:o n put [nov ny] 8
/ n[nnD e|]oa in [// j?]pt? epa [n:r] ''asDa [spir] 9
-aafoa . . ,]ai o[sDa] piki^d [najx f/approw] 10
1. e.
« < • ♦ • • < •
. . y .
.1 InJ 1
y pa . . .
♦ . . 11
d.
c.
b.
p:n
Y
n 5n
N |H
|W
s3 PUT
So*
/// ?^pb>
xb nw
N
ftB?
T
aaa
x
30
1 On the 2 1 st (?) of Phamenoth, year 5 of Amyrtaeus the king at that
time 2 said Menahem b. Shalom, Aramaean of Yeb the fortress, of the
detachment of Nabukudurri, 3 to Sallua daughter of Sa/ttuah, as follows :
You have a claim on me for the sum of 2 shekels, 4 that is the sum.
of 1 stater, being part of the money and goods which are (prescribed)
in the deed 5 of your marriage. I, Menahem, will give it and pay you
in full by 6 the 30th of Pharmuthi, year 5 of King Amyr/aeus. If I have
not 7 paid off and given to you this sum of 2 shekels, that is 1 stater
8 by the said day which is written above, and it come to the ist{?) of
Prthons, 9 this your money, the sum of 2 shekels that is the sum of
1 stater, shall be doubled (?), 10 and I 7vill give you, Sallua, your money
and your money u . . . if 1. sue you or sue your son
Line 1. I~^1. There may have been another unit, i. e. 22 or even 23.
fHN goes with the preceding (Ungnad), not the following words.
Line 2. [Dn30] is certain from 1. 5. Of his father's name D1 is
certain, so that we may identify him with Menahem b. Shalom in 2518
(416-7 b. c.) and 441 (undated). a1 *T vontf is unusual. Cf. 72, where
the man also belonged to the degel of Nabukudurri, but he only held
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 35 131
property in Yeb, and 25s, where Menahem was a witness. For whatever
reason, Aramaeans are usually ' of Syene ' and Jews ' of Yeb '. See
Introduction, p. viii. On the persistence of the name of the degel
(461 to c. 400) see note on 282. The system of the degel remained in
spite of the revolt. Nmn for Nm'a, a mistake?
Line 3. m[o]D. The missing letter may be O, from the trace
remaining, but no such name is known. Cf. niOB' 2 221«23.
Line 4. nnriD = o-TaTi]p. The first occurrence of a Greek word in
these texts. Due to the revolt? m*p }0 as in 29s, 'part of (Heb-
nvpD). nsp does not mean ' total ' (as Ungnad).
Line 5. WU13N "13 D is her kethubha, cf. 144. }b!>BW another
instance of the energetic imperfect without pronominal suffix, as pointed
out by Seidel, cf. 810 and Ahikar 8,2.
Line 6. TiEHS^ ",-:5- This was the next month after Phamenoth, so
that he engages to pay within five weeks.
Line 8. DJn[s^ /]2 the next month after Pharmuthi. We might
restore DJn[B rwja. The 2 after nee is strange, but it must be the
preposition. Elsewhere i? or bv- For the tense, cf. io7.
Line 9. [*lpjr] a mere guess, from n8, where see note.
Lines 10, 11 are much broken and the restoration is uncertain,
[^pruxi] cf. ^JD^'NI 1. 5. . . .]N1. We should expect JV3"0 as
in no. 11, but there is no obvious word.
Line 11. iy (Ungnad). The "I is doubtful, and the connexion more so.
i?D might be part of i>3\ but that would require an imperfect after it, not
ncn, which seems to be the reading.
Of the small fragments, c refers to some transaction, later in the deed,
relating to barley and a sum of 3 shekels.
In e, \i2 [s^ntri] suggests the end of the deed. The lower part of the
fragment is blank, so that probably this came at the end of the line and
the witnesses' names were written at the side as in no. 11.
No. 36.
Part of a Marriage Contract. No date.
Fragments onlv. No name or date. It is not certain that the small
pieces belong to the same document as the large fragment. The writing
seems to be by a different hand.
This is undoubtedly part of a marriage contract like no. 15, and deals
with the gifts to the bride. The mention of clothing and a bronze cup
and bowl, here as in no. 15, suggests that these were customary gifts.
k 2
i32 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 36
Sachau, plate 10. Ungnad, no. 9.
e> p i-> mn 1
/6 . . . o \// ji>pu> epa 'on \JH ppsi \//3 \/// pu's \/ /// ion 2
jox ffmn
nmn / no . . 5 -3 p^n \/// |&p» epa w mn \/7/ a v/7/ w 3
pru n I y^i \f/7T-> \-bn spa 'on en: *r I ep -> pbn 4
c. b.
anT n^i 1 1 a epa \mo[n] . , ^? II |!>pp fp2
a b \\/'/ m f?pv '"on
1 new, 1 1 (?).... 2 5 cubits 4 hands by 3 (cubits) and 4 hands, worth
the sum of 3 shekels ; 1 . . . new, 7 cubits 3 by 4 and a span, worth the
sum of 4 shekels 20 hallurin; 1 . . . new, of wool, worth the sum of
4 10 hallurin; 1 cup of bronze worth the sum of 15 (?) hallurin; 1 bowl
of bronze ....
Line 2. 5 . . . O. Perhaps the same as the equally illegible word in
1. 3, but written by mistake without the PI. It must be some kind of
shawl, as in no. 15, but 0'3B> cannot be read. nmn. Ungnad and
Sachau »T nnn, but it is difficult to read the marks so, and measurements
are never preceded by T. The n is rather far from the n — perhaps it
was partly erased.
Line 3. nnn not nnn (Ungnad), which does not need to be repeated.
HO . . b. Only the n is certain.
Line 4. ep as i51G, or D3 as 1512 followed as here by yi?r.
Of the smaller fragments, Sachau puts together the two parts of b and
reads them consecutively, but ' 2 shekels whose value is 2 k.' is impossible.
He reads 'J, but it is ♦ ♦ 7t, an incomplete word, so that there was a space
between the pieces. In the other line "*bn is not on the same level as
jbpW, so that perhaps the pieces are not consecutive. From the texture
of the papyrus they seem to be so. c is unimportant.
No. 37.
A Letter.
A well-written piece, but the ends of all the lines are lost, and it is
difficult to establish their connexion. Letters were generally written in
long lines, and much may therefore be lost.
No year is mentioned. Yedoniah, to whom the letter is addressed, is
no doubt the same person as in 301, so that the date must be not far from
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 37 133
410 B.C., but there is nothing to indicate it more exactly. The letter
reports to the heads of the community some cause of complaint against
the Egyptians, in which Arsames had given a decision. The details are
quite obscure. It was sent to Yeb from some other place, possibly
Thebes (see on 1. 6).
Sachau, plate 11. Ungnad, no. 10.
[wnbw ""Nio rbv .... D]roy nb*m nmN mnyo hot \s*no bs* 1
] 1 dv b33 ruya run |b obc py b33 ibxB" 2
pn]K Dia'na bap in ivr in jDna^na bap in 3
]n }Di pm jnb nnc ansa na [b wk 4
] p[n pay masa pb dehn nip tcnso*? 5
] snob mpa in jpitd p»N pi w nrno 6
Jfnao an jya nn rorun p»w na bnn: 7
jonp
n]in nara xb pi? perw by pmn pba ib ;n 8
J pajN "pemd jD^a dbhs anp pbo idjp 9
]st? bx >3&>e fbsn jbvin apn can pnatm 10
Reverse.
]m '•aaob *330 13 ids nns oanab pbo n
]nj» mm //"* pnriD spa '•b ami s'Dnanai 12
]i3 mn ncx ana by vita na sb am mn 13
N]ns nasi dp-ik pwi pb pbai tobe mxa 14
njnjw nj rono by] Nnnsx iuo ^axab ////// ova iba n mm 15
nbo nay: 16
(Address.)
nmx] mny» mnjo »*n» ?k i 7
1 To my lords Yedoniah, Ma'uziah, Uriah and the army, your servant
The welfare of my lords ?)iay the gods 2 seek at all times. It is well
with us here. Now every day of a he received rations (?). One
pay-day (?) he received an extra ration 4 is ours, because the
Egyptians give them a bribe, and since 5 of the Egyptians before
Arsames, but act dishonestly. Also c the province of Thebes,
and say thus : It is a Mazdaean who is set over (the) province
7 we fear robbery because we are few. Now behold, I thought
8 if we had appeared before Arsames previously. But it was not so ... ,
9 He will speak words before Arsames, he pacified us, appeasing our
anger . . . . 10 You will find ? ? n full of wrath against you. Pasu b.
Mannuki came to Memphis, and 12 and the ration ; and he gave
134 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. tf
me the sum of 12 staters, and one l3 Hori gave me, since they
had withheld it on account of the pitcher. Tirib . „. said u by
order of the king, and we withheld (it) from them. So he gave damages
against Arsames and pardoned Zeho 15 and Hori, what they
had withheld. On the 6th day of Paophi the letters came to the province
of Thebes, and we 1G will do the thing.
17 To my lords Yedoniah, Ma'uziah, Uriah
Line 1. The words restored are part of the usual formula. Before
them the name of the writer must have stood, either X or X bar Y. The
line therefore contained 44 or 53 letters approximately.
Line 2. »f the relative? or [*]i],,t as in 1. 3 ?
Line 3. JD"iSTiD plural, therefore not connected with in, but the end
of a clause. Zend paitifrasa means 'judgement', 'retribution', hence
'payment'? Lidzbarski 'rations', from ns and D12? In nG D*13 is
'pay'. "pn perhaps Persian. From the context it seems to be a
technical term for 'pay-day'.
Line 4. \rf? ' to them ' as in 34s. p) Ungnad JET, but the phrase is
always W not »f JD1, and the letter is more like a 1.' It is difficult to see
how the line is to be completed. Perhaps [. , , ub HJT Wi]^ f£1.
Line 5. jr6'but'. rv3M adverbial from 33JI ,' thievishly '.
Line 6. NJ nJHO not ' our province ', which would be jn^HD, but the
' province of No ' i. e. Thebes. jr*TO is good Persian for a ' worshipper
of (Aura)mazda '.
Line 7. TT2 goes with the preceding Words, since Jjn always begins a
new sentence. It must be object of bffiD , though the order is strange.
fhSD. Sachau and Ungnad niD, but the D is fairly certain. It must
therefore be part of the common Aramaic verb "DD.
Line 8. pip adverbial, for plpb (Sachau). Then p5> may(?) be 'but'.
Line 9. \D^ in 402 seems to be a name, and so perhaps here.
Asyndeton is common.
Line 10. fira^n Haphel with n omitted. The rest of the line is un-
intelligible, though the reading is certain and the words are well-known.
Dpn if from Dip, would be singular, though a plural verb preceded.
f?T\n if from i>nn (Heb. 'twist') suggests that J^nn are 'ropes'. i?V "^PD.
The 1 may be only a false start of the X . ' Drawing out shade ' and ' ex-
tending protection ' make equally little sense.
Lines 11-17 are on the reverse.
Line 1 1. Cfimb J^O . From Ezek. 1630 and no. 414 it would seem that
}^D is ' full '. With mb Baneth eft. Ass. libbdtu ' wrath '. It can hardly
be for ~T\^ in both places.
Line 12. pnnD as in 354-7-9, a late text. The stater was 2 shekels.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 37 135
fttO mm not 'one mina' as Sachau, nor 'one of them', since both mina
and stater are masculine. Perhaps Heb. njo ' portion '.
Line 13. \"ilba from N73, frequent in legal documents, 'to prevent
someone from getting his rights'. KID 'jug' or 'pitcher', part of the
matter in dispute. Sachau prefers to read N"D (i. e lb) and Ungnad eft.
Bab. karru. JUHTI. Perhaps a name, like Tipi/?a£os, &c, but it is
not certain that 13 (not "13) belongs to it.
Line 14. TVf&2 for the later nNflO. pMl must begin a new sentence
(not as Sachau), since there is an extra space before it. It is a strange
word to be applied to so great a man as Arsames, if he is the object.
'Gave damages against' is only a conjecture. Sachau's explanation of
ptt does not seem possible. [t*]n¥. The n is not very certain. Zeho
and Hor are associated as servants of 'Anani in 38*.
Line 15. 100 masculine, with a feminine subject.
Line 16. nbo like Heb. in a 'thing'-
Line 17. fTsfiiO quite clearly, for rT> in I. 1.
No. 38.
A Letter of recommendation.
A letter from Ma'uziah at Abydos to the heads of the community at
Yeb, stating that he had been helped by Zeho and Hor who are now
going to Yeb and deserve to be well treated.
The papyrus is written on both sides (11. 9-12 on the reverse) and is
much broken. It is not dated, but see on 1. 3.
Sachau, plate 12. Ungnad, no. u.
]ia nn:n tpsf! -ia jno Nnbx Vf *t twnai nms rw \sno bx 1
nip vtnn }cmb[i py baa n"j^ bar* wot? nbx "Jxno d^b> .Tnyo may 2
n I tutsan "rnby \nox oath koo N^n an jhti na nyai k*ob> n^% 3
mm oy ninmc *My "»^y mm Knx pnx by wban ma a*:: inavn 4
im nnix oa^by man pntc ten jya »jtar» ny wop hbx bboa wirn 5
Dmby
np*K3 nbo na p onbap rap arm Da jo nya-- Nnv n nboi lax no 6
fya iy pmraa rraan n jo pby in Dun . . , . *m Dab bab [inaew vb 7
pna |o ibir orus mm D^by mn nn[:a] nay D[mnn]b mnb jnayn n noi 8
Reverse.
r»K nbir 73 Dab nn'pDn b ;i Jan n55* no D3T n bapbi pa: 9
in oa^by
-^6 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 38
»r »ay n'33 wms nv cp pon i[?jn] nmp max nta ^ ncx io
jrojm
yay |d jinan11 n^ p6 ii
Sns n5 nfiyo [s^J'n n khii-pi N>:m[i] pp-iin n>3T 'k-ib b« 1 2
1 To my lords Yedoniah, Uriah and the priests of the God Ya'u,
Mattan b. Joshibiah and Neriah b. . . . . 2 your servant Ma'uziah. The
welfare of my lords may the God 0/ heaven seek abundantly at all times,
and may you be favoured before 3 the God of heaven. And now, when
Waidrang, commander of the army, came to Abydos, he imprisoned me
because of a precious (?) stone which 4 they found stolen in the hand(s)
of the dealers. Afterwards Zeho and Hor, the servants of 'Anani, used
their influence with Waidrang 5 and Hornufi, with the help of the God
of heaven, until they got me freed. Now behold, they are coming there
to you. Look after them G as to what they want, and in the matter
which ^eho (and Hor) asks of you, help them. So when they find no
fault 7 in you, they will acknowledge to you that Khnum is against us
from the time that Hananiah was in Egypt till now. 8 And what you do
for Hor, do for both of them. Hor is a servant of Hananiah. Sell (?)
from our houses 9 goods, and according to your ability pay what he
assesses. Whatever is lacking to me makes no difference to you. On
this account I am sending word to you. He 10 said to me : Send a letter
first (?). If there is anything wanting, the amount is fixed for it in the
house of 'Anani. What you do n for him will not be hidden from
'Anani. 12 To my lords Yedoniah, Uriah and the priests, and the Jews
of the army, Ma'uziah b. Zeho (?).
Line 1. The names are fairly certain, though only the upper half of
the letters remains. The name of the father of Neriah is lost, and it does
not occur elsewhere.
Line 2. "pay a slip for nanny. He was really thinking only of
Yedoniah. The restoration is the common formula. Tinn • Sachau
reads 11.1, which would be difficult. The n is practically certain. Note
the horn at the top. There is hardly room for 11 , and it is possible that
the scribe wrote inn (by mistake ?). It is not Jiinn , being jussive. nip
very indistinct, but no doubt right.
Line 3. K»Dti> H7N not i^nba as elsewhere. Because he was writing to
the priests? s^n m. Therefore before 411 b. c. when Waidrang
held the higher office of fratarak (305). an^ , so that the commander
of Syene had jurisdiction over Abydos. spvm*, as one word, can
hardly mean anything but a precious stone, though the expression is
strange, spx implies ' refining ' and is correctly used of silver. A testing
stone (lapis lydius) would hardly be valuable enough. The i is only
equivalent to the indefinite article, like in elsewhere.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 38 137
Line 4. priN by cf. Ahikar 133. 'y *»^y not 'slaves', since they
were in a position to reason with Waidrang, but subordinate officials,
' secretaries '. 'Anani was a man of high position, since he is mentioned
as well known. Perhaps the same as in 2623, the secretary of Arsames.
mntl'S cf. Dan. 615. Properly ' wrestle ', ' struggle '.
Line 5. ""Sinn Egyptian. ^t33 cf. »1 ittan in Behistun frequently.
DiT^y irn 'look upon' in a friendly sense, cf. 41°.
Line 6. Dn^2p 10p also in a friendly sense, ' rise up before them ', i. e.
meet them half-way, not as Sachau ' withstand them '.
Line 7 must contain the apodosis to the sentence beginning with *?3.
The second nib is not a dittography (as Ungnad), but begins the
apodosis. It must then be followed by a verb, not a title (as Ungnad).
The verb is illegible and possibly something was written above the line.
If Ulb is ' to you ' the verb should be ' they will admit ' or ' ils vous
donneront raison '. It is possible, however, that we should read [n^Jm?
and supply something like 'they will attribute it to'. Evidently there
was some trouble between the Jews and the priests of Hnub, as in no. 30,
and Zeho and Hor were coming to inquire into it. The writer wishes to
warn Yedoniah that it is important to make a good impression on them.
It is tempting to read D13PI [n t&yn n]»3$> but then there is no verb, and
*T does not seem probable. As to Hananiah, cf. 212. His mission to
Egypt was an important event. As suggested above (introduction to
no. 21), it was perhaps his institution of animal sacrifice in connexion
with the Passover, which caused trouble with the Egyptians : Hnub was
hostile to the Jews from that time (419 B.C.).
Line 8. D . ♦ , . b. Perhaps D[nnn]^. WO$. If this is the same
Hor, he was apparently employed both by 'Anani and Hananiah. The
latter, though a Jew, was a Persian official. lblt perhaps ' remove ',
cf. Arab. Jij. They were to hide their valuables for safety. Or ' sell' as
Seidel and Barth, cf. Is. 46s ?
The sense of the next two lines is obscure.
Line 9. The beginning is nearly obliterated. This is Sachau's reading,
which is probably right. JD3J 'goods', indefinite, any there may be.
D3T 'your ability'. One would expect M"P3. nJi6r is probable.
Sachau's pon I is impossible. 13i"l. Sachau's HOT is impossible.
T (Sachau) very uncertain. One would expect }n 'if. "b is more
probable than ab (Sachau). pon perhaps. It looks like mon. Can
it mean ' whatever loss there is to me, does not matter to you ? nn
(Sachau) very doubtful. rbv as elsewhere, ' I send word '. in. It
is not clear who is meant.
138 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 38
Line 10. nmp. This seems to be the only possible reading, but the
form is obscure. lf^nJ is purely conjectural. Meaning ' if you can-
not pay in full ' ? n5;c> is probable. It apparently means ' an account
is kept'. wnnx. Sachau eft. o4, 137.
Line 1 1. I"6 i.e. for Hor. pDarV. I think the meaning must be as
translated, but the verb ought to be singular. Perhaps it is an error due
to the preceding jnayn.
Line 12. [n^Jti T and the rest is very much obliterated. The more
usual phrase is 3*3 n, but the n is probable. irnjlD may be supplied
from 1. 2. The rest is as read by Sachau, but cf. 332, &c, which would
suggest fro n2, and perhaps this might be read here. There are traces
of something above the line.
No. 39.
Two fragments of the beginning of a letter.
Only the greetings remain. The address is written on the back. There
is no date.
Sachau, plate 13. Ungnad, no. 12.
bi2 *3»^b> ibvw bs t&nbtt [cb]v yenn <aiay rffcts* vitno bx 1
nbv py
nb& ptwwi Di:nn ubw nmm n[na nb]v was tikio d^> omo »nio 2
*mwn nyai rT»W>3 tbw wbv n f cbv bwn D^ nD^'o 3
-i»t6 bw ^ 'ids 4
5fiT5 run
. . . , unny [ni^ ti]n-id ^n 5
1 To my lady Selava, your servant Hosea greeting. May the gods all
seek your welfare at all times. Greeting to 2 my lord Menahem.
Greeting to my lady Abihi. Greeting to her son and her daughter.
Greeting to Tekhnum and Ya'uyishma'. Greeting to 3 Meshullemeth.
Greeting to Hazul. Greeting to which are upon you. Greeting
to all of them. And now, you have ratified 4 Ye'osh
said to me as follows : Pay (?) in gold (?)....
5 To my lady Selava, your servant Hosea
Line 1. nW only here. Perhaps the same as m^D, &c, elsewhere.
Feminine of "^(Y^D) 'quail'? *2fl3JJi This-is only a polite form. He
was not a slave. [B?]B? is probable from the next line. There is
a space after it.
Line 2. n["U] seems to be required by nmJi.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 39 139
Line 3. ^yb]) *T is fairly certain. I cannot guess what it means, nor
how the lacuna is to be filled. rp^3 must mean ' everybody '. The
n is uncertain and the form anyhow is strange, perhaps popular. Tllw'in
can only be 2nd pers. fern. Haphel of *W. Cf. S-C, M a 6, 8 where it is
taken in the sense of ' ratify ' a document.
Line 4. The beginning is lost. tri&O ^ "IttN. Only the tops of the
letters remain, but the reading is tolerably certain. 3nf3 rnn very
uncertain. Cf. 42°.
No. 40.
Fragments of a letter.
No date. Address on the back.
Sachau, plate 13. Ungnad, no. 13.
tb& pi? i>33 W[*] n^p n[ta 'nx tbw n]wn "prw *vbs »hk ba 1
. . . ,]3N cbv »TO3i new
in ww njK rblx *n rbny n xtaya nyop 2
]ni jd^ pox nna
»aa^ T^y W» ^[y • • ]N^ P"i3-6y maa r6tn 3
]nn.T n bi pn^
. . ♦ . i>y rtein ibn nfoirnyo 4
jna -n nqnrtn Tinx efne in *b}^b tin* bs 5
1 To my brother Piltai, your brother Hoshaia^. 7/fo? welfare of my
brother may the God of heaven seek at all times. Greeting to Sheva and
his children. Greeting to Ab . . . 2 I have heard of the trouble which
you took when I went. I and Zeho b. Peha spoke to Paisan (?)
and . . . . 3 and he sent a letter about it to Zeho (?) concerning
the children. About you my heart is distressed (?). All that he gave ....
4 Ma'uziah. Your matter you should send to ... .
5 To my brother Pil/a*' b. Feosh, your brother- Hoshaiah b. Nathan.
Line 1. , . . 3X. Perhaps [w]3M or [x]3N.
Line 2. fc6»j?3. Seidel explains the 3 as otiose, cf. 165. If so, it
may be a mark of familiar style. »T3 rather than if3 as Sachau.
rPW, so Sachau. fD^S seems to be a name here, but cf. 37°. , . . XT.
Sachau . . esi. Seidel [J3#]*lK1.
Line 3. p-i3-6y as one word, cf. p3B* , . Nx!>. Sachau reads
NXn and takes it for Nm&. yby with what precedes ('to you') or
with what follows (' concerning you '). pHtf = pno ' empty ' ?
I4Q ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 40
Line 4. irnyn fairly certain. nbft 'matter' ("Dl) as in 371C.
fvK'nn more probable than p" (Sachau) if bv follows.
Line 5. B>| IN"1] seems to be the only possible name. *pnx. Sachau
thinks they were step-brothers, but nN is only a polite form of address to
an equal, cf. 2i2,n and frequently.
No. 41.
Fragments of a letter.
Chiefly containing complaints that the writer has not heard from the
addressee. Undated. The beginning of every line except the first, is
lost. LI. 6-9 are on the reverse.
Sachau, plate 14. Ungnad, no. 14.
"W [li>]Nt5» N^3 N"[n^N TIN D^ ..... D3inN VW31 N]nS TIN *>N 1
py ^
•pta hy dnbe f5 m 2
ns?EK> nnn N»atJ> nync
T^y Dh[aJ nin n 3
jm pi>t? i-6c>n rvin
p» [^] now N^ 4
nh Dip innb n^o rvin
mn mas* po jo n 5
"by nrbv tb 10^3
Reverse.
»rrcn N"D^y by nn , 6
irvsb "nyn »n
n [j]o na» p^m 7
icym -p^ Tfia»s& nay
£5^3 , 8
Min[K . . , ,]n -13 . . . , [Mia3i nna n3 nto tk] ' i>x 9
1 To my brothers Zehfl and his sons (?), your brother the welfare
of my brother may the gods all seek abundantly at a// times 2 And
whenever a letter came to me I heard of your welfare,
I rejoiced abundantly. I heard 3 who used to come to you,
I used to send a greeting to you. Now 4 they did not tell
me. Consequently I was full of wrath against you before Dallah
5 after I came from Syene you did not send a letter to me
about your welfare 6 look after the servants and my house
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 41 141
as you would do for your own house. 7 abstaining from what
he would do in his presence. News of yourself, and your wishes 8 send
to ?ne in peace. 9 To my brothers Zeho b. Peha and his
sons b. H . . . . your brother.
Line 1. [N]nx is probable. Since the pronouns in the following lines
are always singular, it would be supposed that Zeho was the only person
addressed, but in 1. 9 we have D3intf implying more than one person.
The only explanation I can suggest is to supply »nU31. The end
of this line is lost.
Line 2. DNDO. The subject is no doubt max.
Line 3. nn[x]T is probable from the traces remaining. The con-
struction rin^ mn seems to mean jso uo ' he used to come ', and so
rWN TVin, but it does not occur in'BA, and only rarely in the papyri.
A popular. use?
Line 4. innb xb® cf. 3711. rhl a name? Cf. ni?T\ *)bl, n'hl.
Line 5. n. Part of rblH or a similar verb? mn the indefinite
article, cf. 3019.
Line 6. by "'in as in 38s. The meaning here is clear.
Line 7. [}]» HJO. For the double }d, cf. 2811. If the construction is the
same here, I2y *T \0 must be ' from that which he does '. JO cannot be
for no as Sachau seems to take it. The space after TiWy? shows that it
ends the sentence.
Line 9. It is difficult to reconstruct the address. nnQ is only con-
jectured from 402. Q3inx implies more than one person addressed.
The name of the writer must have preceded it.
No. 42.
A Letter.
Two fragments, very much injured. Apparently a business letter,
but the details are quite obscure. Perhaps connected with no. 38. It
was dated (in 1. 14), which is unusual in letters, but the year is lost, and
there is no other indication of date. LI. 12-15 are on the reverse.
Sachau, plate 16. Ungnad, no. 17.
^33 if? nn.no nw ma.1 nbw y[v)]n ym dT[. . . »n« bit] 1
nysi py
.... EH31 -> ytro qos pb& n[o^]yi xn ]b[^ mp ruro«] 2
pn // /// JKH3 [epv *\o~}p fnj[» i]n n [i]n*[a 3
• • » ♦
i42 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 42
ab jm nn^y idd nni? an^i // /// }[ena] ejoa "]b \r\[:>] n h> "py 4
. . . :vk n wrai ittt n wi*a pr pny an [i]»k5> -j^> ^[no«<] xh Nina 5
ua? n^> }n
[D]ip» n S5DD3 nb nani ruin n Ka[i] fcMva pr n p[\|n ^ya ion 6
■»»i Mi^y
n[n] f)D3 nna^n ;n pny^ »sjd nn Dipn ba yby non[n] nt Nnnjx 7
pny^
jed^ pm i^ ]r\T) pn^wa ^y ^rx pn[yb] nn dds nnapn n^ |m 8
\ nDNi
xap . . . . b) y5v . . , . \ p^5nD \ Days nop n \ nrv pna 9
r\b[v~\ "]b i»n an* vb pi ^y rbv lb inn py '•tai p^n[K>] I jna 10
?ya by
, , , 5 Sb *]? nn55 ^ 5n p"r *I5 . 5ts>&6 pntrn btt ^snvb n^s* nro }n 1 1
Reverse.
np[nn] ,,",', j t .♦♦!?♦., , o^ns*] onp xmn^ im T$>y5n' na 12
. . . *5[d]
|>jc]^y ira I pna ^nmn piyb) pnyb nn Dipn i>« nn^o 13
♦ • n3[p] |[d*3 i]n *awni> \//////-^ 3 2ns [vn^y >3 , ~b 14
[yt^in *]ins \pn [nn di , , . inN S>]S 15
1 7e> my brother .... us, your brother Hoshea., greeting and . . .
exceedingly be . . . upon you at all times. Now 2 we in the presence of
Paisa.n(?) the judge and his servant have paid the sum of 10 kerashin,
and a karash re?nains 3 in your hands, that he should give (?)
5 kerashin pure silver. Now 4 with you, as to his giving you the
sum of 5 kerashin ; and write for them a deed concerning them ; and if
they do not give you all the money 5 at interest (?), and do not speak to
you saying, ' Give security ', buy the house of Zaccur and the house
of ASN ... If they do not sell 6 them, seek out a man who will buy the
big house of Hodav and give it to him for(?) the money at which it is
valued. When 7 this letter reaches you, do not delay, come down (to)
Memphis at once. If you have found money, come down at once.
8 And if you have not found (it), still come down at once. Go to
Betheltaddan and he will give you a striped coat of WASA, 9 a . . . coat
of wool, a PTS, a cloak of . . . dyed, and 6 kerashin.
10 An old coat. And when he gives them to you, send to me. And if
he does not give them to you, send to me. Now n if you come down
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 43 143
to Memphis, do not leave (anything) to ASN . . when he has sold.
Give me according to this .... not . . . 12 when the Jews bring them
before Arsames .... say .... you renounce your claim on me . . . and
after 13 their words do not delay, come down at once and at once bring
down to me a coat in your hand to Memphis . . . as u he wrote to me (?)
. . . about it. On the 27th of Tybi, that is ATisan, year ....
15 To my brother . . . us b. Haggai,_yf«r brother Hoshea.
Line 1. D is clear, and before it probably 1. After D>5£> is another
word of greeting connected by 1. Sachau proposes mini, Ungnad
nnci. The first letter is more like 2 than anything else. Possibly
norm (cf. o7) with a very bad ». After N^P a verb(?) illegible.
The restoration here and in 1. 2 is very uncertain.
Line 2. f"6 is doubtful. Seidel suggests JD'S, as in 379(.?) and 402.
BH31 at the end, not Jtjnai as Ungnad.
Line 3. jn^'1 ijn very doubtful. The connexion would be difficult,
[ppv]- There are traces which may belong to V and 2.
Line 5. Ungnad suggests 'at interest'. In no. 11 the word is rV2"VD.
lf-IEtf''] seems, on the analogy of other passages, to be required by ~\m&
which follows. J3T. The nature of the suggested transaction is not
clear. It may be Peal 'buy' or Pael 'sell'. , , , JtJ>N as in 1. 11.
An Egyptian name?
Line 6. n2ni must be ' and give it '. NDD32 'for the price '.
[Djlp11 if right (and nothing else seems probable), shows the amount
missing between the two fragments. ' The price which stands {or is set)
upon it ', i. e. its market value.
Line 7. NT fem. as in 213, 3017. KBBJT)]. Ungnad 'o\ but there
is room for the more correct D. Dlpn 'stand still', i.e. delay. nn
can only be the imperative of nnj, but one would expect a preposition
after it. p2vb as in 26° &c. Cf. note on Ahikar 103. }fl with the
perfect in the sense of a future perfect.
Line 8. D3X as in 58 &c, but here retaining more of the sense of s;x ,
' nevertheless '. pni'S'ri'a not ' the house of Ilutaddan ' but ' to Bethel-
taddan '. There is no division. Cf. Bethelnathan 1 85 &c. It is formed
with the god-name Bethel, but with the verb in the Babylonian form.
|QDtt> must be descriptive of the garment, but the word is not found
elsewhere. It is probably another instance of a plural with dagesh
resolved, like W»»y, N^n, |ppti>. The singular would then be (N)tSB>
'line' &c, and the garment a coat with lines or stripes. Cf. 3Un 157.
\~nDK1. So Ungnad. The meaning is unknown. The 1 is part of the
word, since the items here are not connected by ' and '. It is no doubt
a further description of the coat.
i44 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 42
Line 9. DDVD is more probable than Ungnad's DpyQ. Perhaps an
Egyptian name for some sort of garment. p?5~lD cf. 731 D in Daniel,
with the Persian final k. It is usually taken to mean ' trousers '. Andreas
'cloak'. jnv very uncertain. Cf. 158. , , , 71 or , , , ?D. NOP
X^S unintelligible here.
Line 10. jm apparently the same as JtfD 11. 8, 9. p*n[&>] 'rubbed'
' worn out ' is better than Ungnad's pTID . rb\w~\. Seidel rb\v DSX] as in
1. 8. But if the reading of 1. 6 is right there would be room only for t}\
Line 11. nm a participle rather than for nnm. rON Ungnad jnJX,
but his ) is only a dark fibre in the papyrus. The reading and translation
of the latter part of the line are very uncertain. 1T33. Only the tops of
the letters remain, and seem to read so. It cannot be "1*13 a ' vow ', nor
can we read ""DJ3.
Lines 12-15 are on tne reverse.
Line 12. [DC£HN] possibly fits the traces remaining, but this and the
rest of the line are very uncertain. np[m] is a likely word, if a law-
suit was in question. "^[d]. Ungnad T. Something must then have
followed to govern DnvD 1. 13.
Line 13. [""BJttJpy seems to fit the traces. The addressee was urged
to go there in 1. 7. As the letter was found at Elephantine he probably
was then there.
Line 14. Beginning very uncertain. 3D3 ends the sentence with
a space after it. The date following is that of the letter. After "Q1J?n7
traces perhaps of n and J. After rw the numeral ("» ?) is obliterated,
and the king's name if it was ever written.
Line 15 not being shown on the facsimile, I have restored it from
Ungnad's reading.
No. 43.
A deed of gift or exchange.
Very fragmentary. Most of 1. 1 is lost, and the first halves of 11. 5-12.
Some of the lacunae can be filled with certainty as the formulae are
known, but much is doubtful.
The date is lost.
Sachau, plate 33. Ungnad, no. 35.
mot* y>2 piN n:6k> n:^ ... in "•sJnd? // /// [-» oi»a] 1
[*iirp rriea ma rvnoao
*t]DD7" nSbfJT nnnN n[n]os ma mos7 [r«Dn]n n?:np srwa y n 2
nvTQSD [ruN
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 43 145
\ bhs^ // n sps N3^o uattt nnp in /// /// t^pp ep3 ^ n3n> 3
noma »a5» nsn* mnoso nax
&na« n^ D^y nyi na? kov jo [\laao np[mi "b 'nam n] biao bapi> 4
Dtya am[i] n [*]33B>nK
»fcnai *b n3 brcjj; n]^[i vhy nana kiddi »ai> nan> n nat nddd] 5
pmi anp 'tanm nx
jras* »afc \r\y vb nam [n na? ssoa DP3 »33B>T n aam p *33pt] 6
men oa[a] // ftna spa
*sra mn n mnta[a» nax tbhs ma jo ^ Nsns wk bjn mntaso nax] 7
^aa^j 3»iai »? wian*
^ mn '» xsnsi nar ks[d3 jo *a3» npnn oi>y iyi nar NOV p iaa] 8
bn3N «h N3^0 ma |0
saaam maan b mai tyna mnoBD na« 33m p 'aatnK] 9
nar ndd3 d[b>3 *]b *r
D-c»a *aam» n [n bs\ sa^o ma jo ^ mn n Nsnsi i?y3D a^na vf] 10
^ya» 3^[n3 n KQ]nai nar ndd3
mnoao ess nar nisd [. ... 13 .... 3ns // jsns spa *sb \r\y] 1 1
ia3 vnnw nnoa ma
N-ioyaD na ,|33» nrw una [na . . . ♦ nnp , ... -13 ... , nnp] 12
nnna [niD«b nnoa ni3 mnoBo n3n3 n pmo ibd 13
1 0« //*? 25th day of Yaophi that is . . . ._>wr . . . 0/ &«£• . ... at that
time in Feb, said Miphtahia daughter of Gemariah, a Jew 2 of Yeb the
fortress, according to her company an Aramaean, to Asori daughter of
Gemariah, her sister and partner (?), saying: /Miphtahia 3 give to you
the sum of 6 (that is, six) shekels, royal weight, of the standard of 2 r
to 1 karash. I, Miphtahia, give (it) to you as a gift 4 in consideration of
the support which you gave vie and I renounce all claim on you from this
day for ever. I have no power to institute against you suit or process
in the matter of 5 this money which I give you and have written a deed
about it and no son or daughter of mine, brother or sister of mine,
relative or stranger, shall have power 6 to institute against you suit or
process. Whoever shall sue you on account of this money which I give to
you shall pay to you a fine of 2 kerashin, as I have said 7 /, Miphtahia.
Also there is the allowance from the treasury to me, Miphtahia, which was
in your possession. You have given it to me, and my heart is content
8 therewith. From this day forth for ever I renounce all claim on you
regarding this money and the allowance which was (made) to me from
the treasury, and I have no power 9 to institute against you suit or process,
2B99 L
146 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 43
/, Miphtahia or son or daughter of mine, compatriot or
partner of mine concerning this money 10 which is stated above and the
allowance which was [made) to me from the treasury and all that is mine.
Whoever shall sue you in the matter of this money and the dWozvance
which is j/rtted above n shall pay you the sum of 2 kerashin. X b. Y
zvrole this deed at the direction of Miphtahia daughter of Gemariah and
the witnesses hereto. 12 Witness X b. V ; witness Z b. Pedaiah ; witness
Manmiki b. SFMRA.
Endorsement. 13 Deed of renunciation which Miphtahia daughter of
Gemariah wrote for Asori her sister.
Line 1. Only // ///are certain. nnDJ m3 as in 1. n. Cf. nnnN
in I. 2. She was probably a niece of Mibtahiah daughter of Mahseiah.
Line 2. i"6:n;>. Epstein takes this as a name (cf. liT^l), but such
a name does not occur and would not fit the usual formula. It is
probably the common word b)l 'her (or his?) company', but the expression
is unusual. [JVD'tJk a doubtful conjecture. If it is right, her father was
a Jew of Yeb, but she had been drafted (owing to marriage or otherwise)
into a company which was reckoned as Aramaean. See Introduction,
p. viii. Epstein proposes [nn]N, but the double description is improbable
apart from other objections. H1D&6. Epstein niDN^n ' D. wife of
Belusuri '. There is a mark (a blot ?) before the b but it can hardly be a a.
ritofl) probable, but the word is unknown. Perhaps a compound of OP ham-
' partner'? or 'twin'? [-|]oEr>~as in 322, not the usual -06. [n:N].
Something more is wanted to fill the space, though the writing is large.
Line 3. //n. The *) is reduced to a mere spot. It is restored here
as being the usual formula. Epstein //?, which is not found elsewhere.
From here the writing becomes smaller. non"0 is more probable than
far (Ungnad). Read HE"?
Line 4. 7i3D. Seidel eft. Ahikar 48, and translates ' in return for
food '. Perhaps it has a more general sense ' support '.
Line 5. The restoration is common form, and so in 1. 6. N*1BD as
in 139 or "IBD as in 133.
Line 6. DB[d]. The 3 is lost, but there is room for it, and it is no
doubt to be read. Seidel thinks D3 = DBX, as DK = DBS in 1311.
Line 7. The Nana mentioned in 1. 8 must have been introduced here,
but the restoration is not certain. It is doubtful if iTriUSO HJN could
stand so far from »?.
Line 8. The restoration is not certain. Rather more is wanted.
Nana cf. 2 439-42. It must be some sort of government allowance.
NI^D n"a 'the treasury'. In n6 N"1S1N.
Line 9. The restoration is no doubt right as far as it goes, but more
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 43 147
is wanted to fill the space. N53Jm JVJJn (Ungnad N'pnJHl) = pTTll 3>1p
elsewhere. Probably Persian. Sachau suggests hamgaetha 'fellow-
countryman'. For NJQin Epstein cites Mandaic tUtOBttn 'competitor',
Syr. Js^>e* ?
Line 10. The restoration is probable.
Line 12. NIEyDD (or NV). There is no doubt about the reading, but
a letter may be lost at the end. Egyptian ?
Line 13. The endorsement is lost, except the last word.
No. 44.
An affidavit.
Fragments, recording, if the restoration is mainly correct, an oath taken
in a law-court. This view depends on the restoration of [nXD]lD in 1. 1
and the explanation of Nft"1 in 1. 2. Apparently Pamisi and Espemet (?)
had possession of an ass. Menahem b. Shallum here declares that half
(the value) of it belongs to him, that Pamisi claimed that half and asserted
that he had given a he-ass for it. Menahem states that he has not
received anything, money or value, for his half. The difficulty is that in
1. 7 Pamisi is called ' your father ', i. e. father of Meshullam, to whom the
oath is addressed. But in 1. 2 Meshullam is called the son of Nathan.
It may be another case of a man bearing an Egyptian as well as a
Jewish name. If so, it appears that Meshullam, inheriting from his
father, laid claim to half the ass, and the father being dead and no
evidence forthcoming of his payment, Menahem took an oath in support
of his rights. Much depends on the amount of space to be allowed
between the right-hand fragment and the rest. On the whole the
restoration of 11. 1-3 seems probable and this would settle the position
of the fragments. There is no date, and no room for one. Sachau points
out that a Menahem b. Shallum is a witness in 2518 (416 b. c).
On the margin are two transverse lines of writing, much faded, which
do not belong to this document.
Sachau, plate 32. Ungnad, no. 33.
*13 cita *0 DTOD [n r»NB]l» 1
\ni -q tbwzb ne"1 [v mijin 2
in-ruini n-ijdm S[r6a v\j2 3
T2 n oik iovb [rh nottji 4
"b ntn riJN "-r b»[ddni ••ooja 5
p"H¥ in ^n rui>s [«n n-^iy 6
L 2
148 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 44
•pax »d!sb nnuDn[r6 -ion *i]n 7
ro^a e£n "ion ^ ari* [d J 8
e^n cjdd »om spa ^ [an*] n$i 9
[na^a] 10
1 Oa//i of Menahem b. Shallum b. 2 Hodaviah which he swore to
Meshullam b. Nathan 3 by Ya'u the God, by the temple and by
cAnathya'u, 4 and spoke io him saying : The she-ass which is in the
possession of 5 Pamisi and Espemz\, about which you sue me, G behold,
the half of it which is mine is legally mine). 7 But Pamisi your father
claimed(?) to own it 8 saying that he gave me a he-ass in exchange for
half of it. 9 But he did not give me either money or value in exchange
for 10 the half 'of 'it.
Line 1. Epstein proposes to begin with [Tn]o, but there is no parallel
for so expressing a date. For the oath cf. 144 seqq.
Line 2. [.THjin, or [jJB>]in, but cf. 2239.
Line 3. [inj'3. As the grandfather is named in 11. 1, 2, we might read
"12 here, followed by a name, but it is difficult to see what the construction
could then be. Epstein proposes nm 12, thus making the parties cousins,
and eft. 22127, 1910. &[r6s]. The N is strange, but probable. N"UD02
properly ' the place of worship ', like Jjs*~° a ' mosque ' (used even of the
temple at Jerusalem). liTtlJJJ cf. ^NTVanay in 22125. The man evidently
did swear by 'Anathya'u, whatever be restored before it, and this was
therefore the name of a god, presumably a sort of consort of Ya'u.
Line 5. [*D»]a is conjectured from I. 7. BD[fiDNl]. The D is fairly
certain, and the termination is so uncommon that we may reasonably
restore the name from 47, cf. 610, 87.
Line 6. '31 n^3 lit. ' the half of it, which is mine, is just', i.e. half of
it is legally mine.
Line 7. nn,lJDn[n^] infin. Haphel, cf. 1530 nni3"in^. Then the con-
struction requires a verb preceding it. Perhaps "ION (?) in the sense of
' thought to ' ' claimed to '. "]12N ''DOS . There is no doubt about the
reading, and it can only mean ' P. your father ', so that Meshullam's
father was named both Pamisi and Nathan (1. 2), as Ashor in 15 and 20
is Nathan in 25 and 28. It is strange to find both names used in one
document.
Line 8. [pp. There is no room for more, if the space is rightly
estimated.
Line 9. epa ''OH ' the equivalent of money ' i. e. valuables.
Line 10. There is a trace of the first letter, but there can have been
only one word, as the rest of the line is blank.
149
No. 45.
A contract.
Fragment, incomplete on all sides, of an agreement concerning fish.
It seems that X had accused Mahseiah of robbing or cheating him about
some fish. Mahseiah was required by the court to swear (cf. no. 44)
that he had not cheated. X now undertakes to pay for the fish in money
or grain of the same value, under a penalty if he fails to do so. The
details are not clear.
The date is lost, but the king was probably Artaxerxes, and if the
scribe was the same as in io2G, the deed was written about 450 b. c.
Sachau, plate 32. Ungnad, no. 34.
wwa [p]D2 K[aJ>|o B>DB»nmn . . .]nae> j[D*a in .... b ... a] 1
. . . ncx]
. ♦ . tm-pa] pD n wk naw na flannel? i[3am« W ... in] 2
onp nk»]KW *[3]e men iDNi> paw nany [in^tn n3« ibk!*] 3
»3B nv]»n ah ps na np6n inn i? n[NDi» uym kwi] 4
. . ,] y:u w n:r N"viay in awx [ ] 5
. . ,]«on »T Drran in 701J bs i? [ ] 6
. . . »]v pa i*> nam ai> jn ^ [. ] 7
. . ,]}3«n jm* i>a \ d^d? \ ap s[3*waN *p fnjN ] 8
dm N]rrva j[iD]a [mi] *asD ^jy [na jna ana ] 9
, , 10
1 On the . . . of . . . /$<?/ z> Afaan, year ... of Artaxerxes the &'#£•,
in Sye ne the fortress, said . . . * b. ... of the company of A rtabanu to
Mahseiah b. SYBA, Aramaean of Syene the fortress, 3 as follows : I sued
you concerning fish, saying, you defrauded me, and / was examined
before 4 the judges and they imposed an oath on you by the God Ya'u, that
you did not defraud me of fish. 5 I come back, or this corn,
the value of your fish 6 to you all your fish, or the
value of them, which you (?) 7 to you, if I do not
pay to you within . . . da_y.r .... 8 I will pay you a fine of 1 kab
of barley for each portion every month and year . . . . 9 Nathan b.
'Anani ivrote this deed in Syene the fortress at the dictation of 10
Line 1 is mostly obliterated, but enough is legible to show that it con-
tained a date in the usual form. The first legible marks are probably
;- rather than *3" or *£T, and the month-name is likely to be Jewish,
though not necessarily Nisan. tJOKTiniN is required by the space.
150 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 45
Line 2. 1[. . .] suggests the degel of Artabanu or Iddinnabu. nyy an
unknown name. At the end it is not clear how the lacuna is to be filled.
Line 3. "jrwi . Something of the kind is wanted, and this is the natural
word. "imy if not a mistake, is a popular form of "D"6j? cf. Dan. 414.
nvon cf. Heb. pDC> &c«> from a root meaning to 'act harshly ' or ' un-
justly '. If ^10 is right it must mean ' took away wrongfully '. ~M°-
There is a trace of J. The shape of » is peculiar, but cf. the * in mrp
1. 7. , , , NCI can only be J"6wi, cf. 163, 208. Then the subsequent
phrase, or something like it, is necessary.
Line 4. n[N010] a word for 'oath', or 'swear' is required by !iT3.
The form of the phrase is not quite satisfactory. In 66 we have ^ Toyu
HSDID ' they imposed on you an oath to me '. Cf. 824. This can hardly
be read here, because the oath seems always to be required of an accused
person to substantiate his innocence, not of the accuser to support his
charge. Here "|^> is the accused, Mahseiah, and "]b MJW = "J1JJH3«
}313, In line 3 pi:, so that both forms could be used. [nx]»n is
necessary to rebut the charge in I. 3.
Line 5. 3iriN is certain, but it is difficult to restore the context,
rut X113J?. It does not seem to have been mentioned before, so that
perhaps mi implies that it was there in court.
Line 6. , . . won • The reading is certain. It cannot be for non .
It looks like a verb in the 2nd person imperfect, ' which you . . .', but
there is no obvious way of completing it.
Line 7. The usual formula introducing the penalty for non-payment.
[, , d]V pa. Probably a numeral followed, 'within x days'.
Line 8. K^nrax] cf. 2014, &c. D12 ' allowance ' or ' ration ' ? The
arrangement is not clear, nor is the meaning of \W\ jn"V ^3 'every
month and year '.
Line 9. The name of the scribe is restored from io20, but it might be
Ma'uziah b. Nathan b. 'Anani as in 183 (about 425 b.c).
Line 10 which should give the names of both parties, is lost, as well as
the names of the witnesses.
No. 46.
A conveyance.
Fragments containing the beginnings of some lines of a conveyance of
property (a house ?) from Shelomem b. Hodaviah to his wife Abihi, or
from some one else to Abihi wife of Shelomem.
The date is lost, and the names give no clue. The writing is unusual.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 46 151
Sachau, plate 31. Ungnad, no. 32.
, . . n nwpi 1
. . . ffoB> ia noita 2
. . . nj? n^> rvx 3
. ♦ . 1 vn . » , 4
... N .,,?., . 5
. . . bv]2) w\p bvi 6
. . . B^B> N^ DN^ 7
do^p 3rv ft nan wva }o nrn]air6 Dip> m 8
///// ;ma spa pa»3K r6 }na>] nnrux \Ta*6 9
rva dss* Nivai xmt^ // 1 ep]2 xata ^3x3 10
pi xh r6 an"1 1 rwnn -12 d»]^b> n nnnsx n
inp . . , -12 . . . inc . . . l]5 113T KHnt? 12
. . . -13 . . , imp . . . 13 . . . i.ib> n]wn 13 itan 13
. . , ia . . . insy . , . -13 . . . inp , . ,]m ia Snia w 14
W3K DM HJf X12D , . . 13 , , . an]a /I III III b 15
n!?ya nijnn 13 dd^ki 16
v
1 and his property, which . . . 2 Shelomem b. SNYTH ... 3 he has
with ... 4 ... his .... s, and . . . 5 6 citizen, or ... 7 but (?)
he has no power . . . 8 and whoever shall arise to drz'w her away from
this house which Shelomem gave 9 to Abihi his wife shall pay her a fine of
5 kerashin 10 by royal weight, of the sta?idard of 2 r to the ten and the
house is truly the house of Abihi n the wife of Shelo?«<?7« b. Hodaviah which
he gave her, and no suit {shall lie). 12 Witnesses : Zaccur b. . . . 13 Meshullak
b. Hoshaiah . . . 14 Witness, Gadol b. Ho .". . 15 Total 8. X b. ¥ wrote
this deed for Abihi 1(i and Shelomem b. Ylodzviah her husband.
Line 1. Tis probably the relative.
Line 2. rVJ)K>. Only K> is certain. The J might be 3 (as Ungnad).
The * is probable. No combination makes a name. This Shelomem
is apparently not one of the contracting parties, since the party
Shelomem has a different father in 1. 16.
Line 3. t 1VX for TTX as also in 54*. Dy . The y is very small and
badly made, but can hardly be anything else. There is no sign of any
letter immediately following D .
Line 4. \T| . . The pronoun ? (e. g. \1133).
Line 5. The tails of other letters are visible, but the words cannot be
restored.
Line 6. [bil ^y]31 perhaps.
152 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 46
Line 7. Ciib. Sachau suggests that it may mean 'people', which is
impossible. Cf. 90, a similar proviso in a similar document. It ought to
mean ]rb. Perhaps for D?? BW. The tt is very strange, but it
cannot be anything else. A pronoun rOK or in must have followed.
Line 8. [nni]3"in? or "jn~, is well restored by Sachau from 1530.
Hence the property must have been either a house or land, and ' her '
or ' you ' must be the wife, Abihi.
Line 10 belongs to the clause stating the penalty.
Line 13 &c. The name-groups do not occur elsewhere.
Line 14. [rT'nJin or [nw]in, and so perhaps a brother of either
Meshullak or Shelomem.
Line 15. The statement of the number of witnesses is unusual.
Line 16. [irijTin. The 1 is not clear, but it can hardly be any-
thing else.
No. 47.
Fragments of a conveyance. No name or date.
Sachau, plate 35. Ungnad, no. 38.
... JO 733 kT 1
. . . b tnoi pD nip ~f? nnai -12 .... 2
. . . jk>-d spa i? }n:a -]b nan* .... 3
. . , «n]»a DB>3 ami p5 4
T\btK& 5
...... nJ 6
.... ki]5i po nip ybv bnptt bin 7
. . . n:x icK bin vb *in ib nam 8
1 of your sons by 2 son or daughter of
yours, before a magistrate or (my) lord to 3 I have given
to you, I will pay you the sum of . . . kerashin .... 4 suit
or process on account of this \\011se .... 5 you {or I)
asked (?)
6 7I shall have no power to complain against you before
a magistrate or (my) lor^ . . . . 8 and have given to you. Moreover
I shall have no power to say : You
Line 1. \o 'by' followed by the name of the mother.
Line 2. In io18 we have pi JJD. Elsewhere KID, applied to Arsames,
seems to be the proper title of the Persian satrap.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 47 J53
Line 3. n3fl\ Ungnad and Sachau mox, but the reading is not
really doubtful. The sentence originally was ' if I claim back anything
which I have given you, I will pay &c.', or something similar.
Line 4. '"11 )"12. So Ungnad. Only the tail of the 3(?) is visible.
The phrase does not occur elsewhere, and the construction is not clear.
It is quite uncertain how much space is to be allowed between the two
fragments, and in fact one would not take the second fragment (from its
appearance) to belong to the same papyrus as the first, but for the use of
the unusual phrase [n~i]01 }3D in 1. 7 as in 1. 2.
Line 6. . . . riS . . . not jmx.
No. 48.
Small fragments of perhaps a marriage contract. No date.
Sachau, plate 35. Ungnad, no. 39.
. . . D "I'D? "13 I
. . . x vb\ uby jo y>ra n ndm bp 2
. . . rr'DriD^ jrus )mvb nnpbzb "jma 3
1 b. Zaccur .... 2 of all the money (?) which is set forth above, and
/ shall not be able . . . 3 your daughter to take her in marriage, I will pay
to Mahseiah . . .
Line 1. ... 6 is doubtful. Seidel conjectures [|33l]D 'of Syene'.
Line 2. N£D3 can hardly be right, nor can Ungnad's K^DSJ. A plural
would not be followed so closely by 3TI3 singular. The rest of the
line must have been ' ... if I wish another wife than your daughter ',
which would make it rather long. Cf. 1531.
Line 3. rPDTO? apparently the father of the bride, who was not old
enough to act for herself as in no. 15. One wonders whether she can
have been the much-married Mibtahiah again, who was a daughter of
Mahseiah. If so it was her first marriage, but cf. note on 82.
No. 49.
Fragment of a contract, or of a deed relating to a claim.
The beginning, containing the date, is entirely lost.
The writing is very unusual, probably by an unpractised hand. Note
the badly made O, 3, n, ), while "• and 1 are of a good, early form.
There are also mis-spellings : see notes.
154 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 49
Sachau, plate 38. Ungnad, no. 45.
. . . id]n7 bibi 13 hubvh *&& 12 >d?dd nos* 1
. . . pyen jom ^dd t?v ^n« ^ nox 2
. . . ]W>i b*k na nw n Dino 7d[i] 3
... f bo ditto D3^[y n]?^]1 ma ~}b 4
. . . 1J0 5FnnB> n . . . 5
1 Said Semaki b. Shashai to Shelomem b. Galgul as follows : . . .
2 said to you, I have against you (a claim for) money and wheat and
barley . . . 3 and anything whereby a man may live, and to send . . .
4 to you, and his son shall send to you some food ... 5
the witness^ hereto . . .
Line 1. "W '2 "ODD. Ungnad eft. I.TDftD (1 Chron. 267) and W
(Ezra io40). DD7B6 fairly certain, for Qiybvb. 7:73 Ungnad eft.
71373 io21.
Line 2. *TOX 3rd person, referring to the claim of a third party.
*7nK if right, is for >b ("OrPN, 'there is to me', cf. 35s. TOn for TO3PI,
with 3 assimilated as in Hebrew.
Line 3. 7D[l]. The 3 is quite certain. As this writer makes his 1
very large (see mil 1. 4), nothing more is required to fill the space.
DITTO as in 1. 4, for D1H3D elsewhere. , . . 7t$6l. The letters missing
cannot be DID". Perhaps nrwh.
Line 4. "]b, not 7D7 as Ungnad. What he takes for the final b is
really the tail of D in the line above. [n]^[^]''- The B> is very
uncertain, but nothing else seems likely. DD^[y] is the most probable
restoration. Note the plural, 7DD for ^>DNO rather than for 73 TO.
Cf. -I1D07 32s.
Line 5. Snnty. The N"» is very doubtful.
No. 50.
Fragments, perhaps of a legal document. The lines are here numbered
consecutively, but their true position is quite uncertain. As to the general
sense, nothing is clear, and there is nothing to identify the date 'year 13 '.
Sachau, plate 38. Ungnad, no. 47.
1
. , . D3n[22] 3D3 . ♦ , 2
. . . 11/-' 1W flnn^[s] • • • 3
. . , 1 anna ybv nya , . , 4
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 50
. . . n]au> . . . ny vxan« n seiaa . .
• • > tana rva tnftta iep1' . . .
. . . »SU3 . , , -D 1/
Ci
. . . / v *\b\ paa
... an nx5
. . . e> i> . .
. . . \/// 1 . .
. . . \nscb .
. , ,//////->
1 2 . . . wrote in P^hons . . . 3
13 (?) . . . 4 . . . suborned against you the men
who were sought out, till . . . -year ... G
treasury. The house of N . . . 7 . . . 2 . . . Kenufi ,
1 thousand talents, . . . shekels .
... to give ... 15 .... 1 6 .
155
5
6
7
8
9
10
n
12
13
14
*5
. P/iamenoih, year
5 the men
they stand in the
10-12
.13
14
Line 1. Nothing legible.
Line 2. DJn[sa] is Ungnad's suggestion.
Line 3. 11/ might be iy.
Line 4. '?y nya ' sought ' i. e. incited or suborned against you.
Line 5. VSariK if right, can only mean ' were sought out '.
Line 6. Construction not clear. , , , Dm a name ?
Line 7. >sua as in 269-21.
Line 9. paa not certain. Cf. 3028 P|^>| p*i3J3. f^I as often, for
one thousand.
The rest contains nothing worthy of note.
No. 51.
Fragment containing the right-hand side of a column of names,
apparently none of them Jewish. The names of the fathers seem not to
have been given.
Line 1 was the beginning of the column, since 1. 10 is numbered ~> in
the margin. A mark on the right, near 1. 6, suggests that originally
there was at least one other column.
156 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 51
Sachau, plate 23. Ungnad, no. 24.
... 1
"mro 2
. ♦ ft . 3
»na 4
ancm 5
wamx 6
. ♦ rn 7
. . 3D*K 8
D31B 9
prnaa io->
rns 11
pit 12
pama 13
riTtw 14
4 Pahi ? 5 VHSTB. Artabanus. 7 Dargman ? 8 'ISK . . . 9 PRNM.
10 Bagabukhsha 10 . n PRNIS. 12 ZBMN. 13 Phrataphernes.
14 Ashyadata.
Line 1 contains no complete letter.
Line 3. , ♦ U. Ungnad "Q.
Line 4. Tia cf. 142. Egyptian, though the rest, when they can be
recognized, are Persian names.
Line 5. . . an^ni a compound of Persian vakhs ?
Line 7. . . :TJ Dargman ? 823 &c.
Line 8. Cf. it^aDK 219.
Line 10. pnaaa Persian Bagabukhsa, Mcya/?u£os.
Line 13. Cf. 517. Ungnad fiama.
Line 14. TWPN Persian Asyadata (Ungnad).
No. 52.
Fragments of two parallel columns containing chiefly names.
No date. At the beginning of some lines in col. 2 are marks, of un-
known meaning. Ungnad thinks they may indicate fractions.
The writing is unusual.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 52
157
Sachau, plate 24. Ungnad, no. 25.
Col. i.
1 . .
. 1
in . .
. 2
"i . .
. 3
m . .
. 4
BBBW . .
. 5
lpyy . .
. 6
by ea[t? .
. 7
mn[«] >? m . .
. 8
Col. ii.
. i . 13 iT'S'K" —
9
.t]-d? 12 ... J
10
. . , £>n ssny ,
1 1
... -12 iT»yioty j_
12
rw[av] na rrytnn
13
!TB[aB>] 12 iTJTN* 1*
14
nH[nr] 12 ,t-dt _
15
mrDo] 12 d^d l,
16
rrp$>n [12] iron* u
17
Col. i.
1-4 5 . . . and we judge G . . . they complain 7 . . . /«dge con-
cerning 8 which you (or I) received.
Col. ii.
9 Josiah (?) b 10 . . . b. Zechzr laA
11 . . . 12 Shemaiah b. . . . 13 Hoshaiah b. Zep/ianiah u Jaazaniah b.
S/iep/iaiizh 15 Zechariah b. Zebadiah 16Meshullam b./aazaniah n Jaaza-
niah b. Hilkiah.
Lines 5-8 look like part of a letter.
Line 8. »f. Ungnad n, but it stands alone.
Line 9. n»B>K\ The W is very doubtful.
Line 14. JVSVC. Ungnad rPtfK*, which is not known as a name. Cf.
the ¥ in 1. 6.
Line 15. fVi[3?] might of course be rVl[2T].
Line 16. D^*D. The D is strange, but can hardly be anything else.
i58
No. 53. j
Fragment containing part of a column of names.
Lines 8 and 1 1 have been erased, or perhaps the papyrus is palimpsest,
before 1. 9 (on the reverse) there are marks of perhaps a line erased.
No date.
Sachau, plate "4. Ungnad, no. 26.
... 12 1
pro 13 i&QQ 2
nxn ia '•an 3
*e6 "13 IDS 4
icon 13 manna . — 5
ysx 13 maoBW 6
rvt?3Dx i3 -inn 7
8
Reverse.
. 13133 "13 DUX'S 9
"330 13 IDS 10
II
1 b 2 Petisi b. Nethin. 3 Haggai b. Beeri. 4 Pasu b. KSI.
5 . nh-hnum b. Hnomo.' 6 Isum-kudurri b. AP'. 7 Hor b. ASKSITH.
Reverse.
9 Isum-ram b. Nabunad(in ?) 10 Pasu b. Mannuki. n
Line 1. Ungnad jna 13, which does not seem possible.
Line 2. The son has an Egyptian name, the father's is Jewish,
pna. The proper Aramaic form of pna used elsewhere.
Line 5. Ungnad and Sachau DiannaD, but » is doubtful. Not 'ruy.
The line at the side is perhaps "*.
Line 6. ySN or bsn.
Line 7. Cf. 518.
Line 9. 13133. A final J does not seem possible.
No. 54.
Fragment containing two imperfect letters, one on the recto and one
on the verso. They are in different hands, both unskilled, the recto
being the more so. Evidently both refer to the same matter, but their
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 54 159
relation is puzzling. Sachau and Ungnad think that one side is the
answer to the other. If so, the reverse would seem to have been written
first, note 1. 15, '33^ )vbv and 1. 2 'i£> nn^. This, however, does not
suit 1. 10 ''NIB and 1. 1 "Qy, if the words are used literally, but perhaps
they are only formal and Sachau's view is best. The letters cannot be by
two writers to the same person, note 1. 4 "J^> and 1. 11 'b.
On the recto a line is written vertically at either side. Something is
lost at the end, but probably not much at the side of the verso.
Sachau, plate 36. Ungnad, no. 40.
m[wi] nSnv 1
r\rb& nh 2
jnjia6 3
*]b rrx p 4
-> pon 5
ion ppaj* 6
, ♦ . =(? pjn 7
right-hand side. NJtJ> [*]ni55 nan H . . . 8
left-hand side. ^n]:5r^J Tn[y . . . 9
Reverse.
^no tbv i3:5p[y jo 10
-'pen ^ ;n nys [m& n
, ♦ . * D3^I K . . . 12
nv3 jrooa u . . . 13
S^nm Dip jo [l]nob ... 14
paw jrmai!> )rbv ... 15
1 Your servant Wo HI. 2 Behold, I have sent 3 to Nabunathan (saying) :
4 If you have 5 10 asses 6 they will give them up(?),7 also to you . . .
8 . . . here his sons exceedingly. 9 . . . your servant (?), we will rescue
him.
Reverse.
10 From 'Akabnabu, greeting to my lords n exceedingly. Now if I have
1 o asses, 12 yours (?)••• 13 Nabunathan ... u
to go (?) from the commander. 15 send to Nabunathan and he
will give up
Line 1. [D3]l3y. The tails remaining can hardly represent anything
but M~. On the other hand this does not agree with "p (clearly) in 1. 4.
Tifc")] only a conjecture, but '■n is probable. Cf. 2 2133,131.
160 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 54
Line 2. Nil. The X has an archaic form.
Line 4. rVN is certain. Ungnad nnx. For TVK. Cf. 46:>\ *]b. The
1 is archaic.
Line 5. ~> pon is certain. The numeral is not quite clear, but is
corroborated by 1. 11. There is nothing more in the line.
Line 6. pp2B*. For the l cf. 1. 3 |n:n^. It is not an, as Ungnad.
' They will leave them alone ' i. e. lay no claim to them ? iron probable,
with n above the line.
Line 7. All uncertain.
Line 8 vertically on the right-hand side. »V is the end of a word.
["■JmSa fairly certain. Not "3 (as Ungnad), cf. the "J in 1. 4.
Line 9. Vertically on the left-hand side. 1"l3[y]. The "] is
doubtful. The following mark is not N (as Ungnad), but the 1 pro-
jecting from 1. 6. Vl]33TSW. The 2 is strange. There are traces of
M", which is suitable if this is the verb 3KJ>.
Line 10, on the verso, begins the other letter. in33p[y] is Ungnad's
reading. There is a mark after it which may be unintentional. Before
it probably }D, which would fix the amount lost at the beginnings of the
lines. '•SID plural? Cf. ir6c in 1. 15 if that is imperative.
Line n. N"1:^ fits the space as determined by 1. 10.
Line 12. D3^r uncertain. There seems to be an N above the line,
but Ungnad reads \3?<r. The last letter may be a D as in Dip 1. 14.
This would be suitable if iNltt is plural, but y fern, could not refer to
iiT\D masc. After it Ungnad reads DIV n , . „ but this is very doubtful.
Line 13. DV3 faint and uncertain. Ungnad 13X2, and Sachau con-
jectures [d]13N3 ' in Abydos ', but the X would be impossible in this hand.
Line 14. ["ijnck is Sachau's conjecture. There is no sign of the "J.
After 1. 15 the rest is lost.
No. 55.
Fragment, as Ungnad thinks, of an inventory incomplete on both sides.
It may, however, be part of a letter. If so, it would seem to begin on
the reverse, cf. no. 54. This depends on the amount lost. A line may
be wanting at the beginning, but there does not seem to be much missing
at the sides. There is no date.
Sachau, plate 36. Ungnad, no. 41.
Obverse.
\ HDSni I
'bam 2
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 55 161
era mar 3
*r \ . . . . 4
. . . b mex 5
•JVT37 n.T 6
Reverse.
}]n^sno 7
k? v jncd 8
. nm . 13 . 9
|n5 . . . 10
\ r^mm 11
\\ pSS 12
Obverse.
1 and 1 tpsh 2 and Zechariah gave me 3 (1) karash. i . . . 1 ... which
5 1 said to . . . 6 he gave to GDVK (?)
Reverse.
7 Bethelnadz';/ * 1 MS'N of 9 AbydosQ) and go down (to) Syene(?) 10 . . .
give. u and 1 hat. 12 2 . . .
Line 1. rtDSm apparently a noun. The 1 shows that it cannot begin
the document.
Line 4. 'TV. Ungnad ITT. It is uncertain whether anything followed T.
Line 5. . 7 hardly '7, as Ungnad.
Line 6. All quite uncertain. There is no name like 71*12.
Line 7. [}]*127N*T,*1 not fro" as Ungnad. A Babylonian form. Cf.
1 84-5.
Line 8. |N£'E as in I516a. Meaning unknown.
Line 9. ,13. Read L212N Abydos ? An N is hardly possible. nm
cf. 427. If it is a verb, the stroke following cannot be \. Perhaps
[P]D ?
Line 10. }n5 or [ft3?
Line 11. n?3T3 (not '"ID 42°) 'a hat' as in Dan. 321. A Persian, not
a Jewish, garment.
Line 12. pSF. So Ungnad, but the second V is like the N in 1. 8.
Sachau thinks it is = n*V2V.
No. 56.
Fragment of the beginning of a letter, with part of the address on the
back. No date.
2589 M
i6a ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 56
Sachau, plate 37. Ungnad, no. 44.
. . . nyai py baa 1»hs> ^tttf* wnta , , . 1
. . . irrb nayi pd!> S>tk . . rv na n . . . 2
... in N^a-ia i[a] ms » 3
Reverse.
jna na nta l[i]nx $>na [~ia . . . tin bs] 4
1 . . . may the gods seek after your welfare at all times : and now . . .
2 . . . -t b. . . . went to Syene and made for Ya'u- ... 3 Azibu b.
Berechiah . . .
Reverse.
4 To my brother . . . b. Gadol, your brother Yislah b. Nathan.
Line 1. A variety of the usual formula, as in no. 39. It no doubt
began JD3 na Pl^D"1 "Jinx bvft "ia . . , TIN !>N, so that quite half the line
is lost at the beginning, and probably something at the end.
Line 2. The names are quite uncertain. Not [piojrv which is fern, in
22
89
. . . liT^ probably, as Ungnad suggests, part of a compound
name.
Line 3. UMN rather than laNN (as Ungnad). Cf. ,aTN 1 Chron. 1137?
N"ana popular for iTO" cf. N^T i 42. Ungnad takes it as ' knees '.
No. 57.
Fragments of a letter. No date. The readings are mostly as in
Ungnad, the facsimile being indistinct.
Sachau, plate 38. Ungnad, no. 46.
. . . nbv N3rv!> \hv
. . . tS hfh 11 frm[a
... in ... * , ,
. . . naota . ,
. . . Tl . .
. . . vh na ♦ ,
. . . n n€3
. . . t&& .
. . . jny .
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 57 163
1 . . . Greeting to Yathna ; greeting to ... . ~ 2 hats .... 3
4 your welfare . . .
5 6 7... like the waters of . . . 8 greeting . . .
9 time ... 10
Line 2. urb. The D is more like ft, but }tn does not occur.
Line 7. ^65 probable. Ungnad only K> , .
Line 8. Ungnad adds a — very doubtful.
No. 58.
Fragment. The recto (1. 3) contains what may be part of the address
of a letter. The verso (11. 1, 2), in an unskilful hand, contains two lines
imperfect at the beginning (and at the end ?) There is no sign of any-
thing above or below them. The letters are rather wide apart, but there
are no spaces between words. Sachau thinks it may be Hebrew, but
after dividing it in various ways, I have failed to extract any meaning
from it, either as Hebrew or Aramaic. Perhaps it is best to regard it as
a learner's writing exercise, bearing no relation to the recto. It was
written on an old scrap of papyrus torn from a letter, and already bearing
the words in 1. 3.
Sachau, plate 37. Ungnad, no. 43.
. . . tbwtbwbyrhxQ ... 1
. . , ri>B*5jh5,Wot£p ... 2
va» -12 .... na ... 3
Of lines 1 and 2 the meaning is uncertain. Line 3 . . . b. Shabbethai.
Line 2. »5p"IB. The p might be a n, and the 3 a 3.
Line 3. Ungnad reads "Htty after the first 13.
No. 59.
The top left-hand corner of a document in demotic Egyptian. The
Aramaic endorsement shows it to be an affidavit, if the two sides are
related.
Sachau, plate 39. Ungnad, no. 49.
Recto, a demotic document.
Verso. . . jon nna n novo naD
Verso, endorsement : Deed of an affidavit, which Haman wrote . . .
M 2
i64 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 59
noio 'd cf. 441.
pn seems to be a complete name, but it does not occur again in these
papyri. The traces of letters after it do not belong to it.
No. 60.
A Greek letter.
Fragments, of which the larger contains part of a letter in Greek to
' king Ptolemy '. On one of the small fragments are traces of Aramaic
writing, but nothing can be read with certainty. The date is said (judging
from the writing) to be early in the third century b. c.
The text was published in F. Preisigke's Sammelbuch griech. Urhinden
i (19 1 5) no. 51 1 1, from which the reading here is taken. It is clearly
the beginning of a letter reporting some attack by Ethiopians (on
Elephantine or Syene ?) which the writer helped to repel.
Sachau, plate 39. Ungnad, no. 48.
/?a]cnA.€t 7TToA€/xatwi xaipeiv 7r€/)Taios dpi>oi'[<£ios
]<£ . . . . Ka.Tef3r]crav aWioires ica[i eJ-n-oAiopK^crai'
~\(j>pa.KTev(xi eyw kgu Suo dSeA<£oi (TT^adfxov (s)
](r . v ivl fiorjOeiav koL dvciAojuej^
1 To king Ptolemy, greeting. Pertaeus, son of Amup/u's ... 2 . . . .
Ethiopians came down and besieged . . . 3 . . . . I . . . and my two
brothers ... 4 .... to help and we destroyed . . .
Pine 3. . . . c/>paKTeino. The <£ is doubtful, as well as the meaning.
If it is a verb, the present tense seems unsuitable. cn-[a#/AoV] does not
seem a very happy conjecture.
No. 61.
An inventory.
On the reverse of a papyrus of the Behistun inscription. There are
two columns, of which the first contains part of the end of the inscription
(see p. 253) and the other contains this list or inventory. The date is
lost. The reading is particularly difficult, owing to the broken and dis-
coloured state of the papyrus. The text here differs a good deal from
that of Ungnad and Sachau.
Sachau, plate 55, col. 2. Ungnad, no. 67, ii.
B>]rti *T pD3 pa[T] 1
]t£ ■•an in pn 2
]\3 0]m »l pDa 3
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 6l 165
nn f|D3 D3 4
. /// eji^a 5
• • • •
6
cp^a 7
// ;n[nn]D n . 8
/// bin®1? , . n 9
n« HJy par 10
. . . roe> ti[)6 /] ova 12
/"3 b> (?)pjd3 . . pra 13
\ PjD3 D3 14
. . . / b* [p]ep 15
///.... T 16
\/////, . (?)^l 17
/.../// 35 18
*9
1 Memorandum : cups of bronze . . . 2 Hanan b. Haggai . . . 3 cups
of bronze 21 . . . 4 cup of silver, one . . . 5_7 8 of 2 s/a/ers . . .
0 ... to eat, 3 . . .
10 Memorandum : 'Ani . . . u Mannuk/ b. 'Ananiah 12 on day / of ^4dar,
year . . . 13 cups . . . the sum of 2 1 shekels u cup of silver, 1 : 15 they
are worth shekels . . . 16_19
Line 1. p3T 'memorandum' as in 321,2.
Line 5. fjl^a is probable, as in 1. 7, or fpta. Meaning?
After 1. 9 there is a blank space, and a horizontal stroke.
Line 10 begins a new list, "oy or "ojy a name ?
Line 12 contained a date which was no doubt nearly that of writing.
"H is fairly certain. Sachau f)D[x] Epiphi, and one would expect an
Egyptian month.
Line 13. After f>D3 probably a numeral. f]D3 is only a conjecture,
but it is better than Ungnad's pa.
Line 15. [i^Bp1 'are valued at'? Cf. i51Ga. & or ///as Ungnad.
After 1. 19 the papyrus is blank.
166 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 61
The following (nos. 62-68) are for the most part groups of small dis-
connected scraps. The reading of them as printed by Sachau has been
revised with the facsimiles and a few passages have been restored, but in
the absence of context it is not possible to make much out of them.
They do not admit of connected translation, but points of interest are
treated in the commentary.
No. 62.
No. 1. The verso of a Behistun fragment.
Probably accounts, like no. 61. Beginnings of lines only.
Sachau, plate 56 (reverse). Ungnad, no. 68 E.
No. 1. f]jn 1
-f- 2
]"U apjnaa rvo 3
n]nr» -12 pn par 4
]na nm^y . . . b 5
]«3 Te> . «!? 6
spa 7
No. 3. , p 1
. h 2
. H2 3
» nn 4
. PT / 5
,i>/6
. rb 7
Nos. 2, 4, 8, 9 Behistun fragments.
Nos. 5-7, 10-20 unimportant.
Line 2 a mark of division, not like that in Ahikar. Perhaps only a
horizontal stroke crossed through.
Line 3. 2p]})22 cf. 2623,28 and 2220 where it is preceded by flKO
(centuria) which may perhaps be read or intended here. The father's
name is not mentioned in either passage.
Line 4. par as in 6i1,1&» The / here and in 1. 5 (in Ungnad) does
not belong to the line.
No. 3. The verso of a Behistun fragment (11. 18-28). Unimportant.
167
No. 63.
On the back of a Behistun fragment (11. 1-15).
Accounts or inventory, like no. 61, in two columns. Beginnings of
11. 1-7 lost. Ends of 11. 8-16 lost.
Sachau, plate 53 (reverse). Ungnad, no. 69.
Col. i.
]?$ xn . . Spa [//] ///[-»] nap / . . 1
\//[/] b e> D^-inx nn:x &nn ////.,. 2
blank.
\/// |nd // a ia[, . . m]ar ma -p . , . 3
. . . sF nota b . . . 4
Is... 5
blank.
-13 s3y , . 13 [yo]B*i.T$>N x . . . 6
X . . . 7
Col. ii.
]////// rw * . . . n3 mar 8
]5n ma X3r6 nnry 9
blank.
] Bii>K> 13 eroo b par 10
] . a // a /// px tw 1 1
];f tarh n»[n]ry ^y paT 12
] . . n N3-i x5 . . y x.y pan 13
blank.
] . . . h "wan n n^p par m
]/7T-> rus? ejBNa ysrix 13 n^[ua] 15
] y-nao rrra p-> . . S> am . . , 16
Line 1. The numeral as restored is fairly certain, cf. 1. 15 which is
probably the same or the next year.
Line 2. X^n. Ungnad eft. ®avrjs in Greek papyri. B*0*inx.
Ungnad eft. Ahartise. & no doubt for f?\>V. 3 not for ep3, as
Ungnad. It must be some term defining ppW.
Line 3. "]3 . . . may be n . . . There is a "113* m3 n3PI3 in 22107.
Line 6. [yD^in^K might be ///""in^X, but there are faint traces of
yia. The name occurs elsewhere, but the father is not mentioned.
168 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 63
Line 8. /// /// riJC is against what was said on 1. 1.
Line 9. Nothing between mry and S'jn?. It is merely a large n.
a:rb as in 1. 12 seems to be some term descriptive of Azariah. In
Ahikar 83 run? the 7 is a preposition.
Line 10. ?JJ (as in 1. 12) after pat, is unusual. For the name
cf. 441.
Line 11. II 2 is written. Probably meant for 111 as usual in
measurements. Then a blank before a new entry.
Line 12. 'f or [N")]J3 as in 1. 9.
Line 13. pn can only mean 'secondly', referring to Azariah, who
was previously mentioned in 1. 9. N,y Ungnad Npy improbable. It
may be N^SDD written close together.
Line 14. N^p cf. TY»ip in i2, the 27th year of Darius, and 52, the 15th ,
year of Xerxes. "15Pa.fl. In Hebrew the Hiphil means 'to come to
an agreement '. In later Aramaic the Pael means to ' settle ' an
obligation, so that the Aphel (not used) might mean the same ' to pay '.
On an ostrakon (Sayce and Cowley M, 11. 5, 6, 8) the word "i^in is used
in a somewhat similar sense. It is tempting to identify the two words,
but 1 seems clear there, and a here.
Line 15. iT?[lJD] is only conjectural. The papyrus is creased. The
name occurs elsewhere, but the father is not mentioned. Date perhaps
as in 1. 1.
No. 64.
Fragments 1-16 belong to Behistun.
Sachau, plate 57. Ungnad, no. 70 B.
No. 17. «na[ No. 18. ]pyts> *«?[»
pN?[a .]?y fro5[
blank.
]*j?iri5 . . . No. 19. ]no*pn .[
m«[ i]n rut* n[
No. 20. ]tm*PB>n[ No. 21. ]b>? , [
]T?y n?e>[ ]ixa[ ] , ?aa[
]nap jv5[?
]n mnn n[JB> No. 22. ]n[
.]dn jnvo[p ]fa[
]n»a n[
]n5e> . . [
No. 23.
]t?33 |5[
]n H33[
No. 25.
M
]-
. ? &b n[
No. 27.
No. 29.
]p»DN n to["ua
]n3^b B>[i]K,'B>[n
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 64 169
No. 24. ]nx>[
]m5[
No. 26. 5l3K[ ]JNpP »T n[
No. 28. ]T s'fi[
]n p »[
No. 17, 1. 1. Perhaps Nn3[j»"lS] as in 264. 1. 2. Sachau suggests
a name p«i>[a"u]. Note the form of the X. L 3. "i^DIV ... a name.
1. 4. m" is clear. Sachau n"V3.
No. 18. From a contract. 1. 1. Sachau restores N3^[» 'J3K3].
1, 2. Sachau jnJOP?]. The remains of O are doubtful.
No. 19. Cf. Ahikar 44, 46.
No. 20. From a letter of the reign of Xerxes, i.e. before 465 B.C.
1. 3. JtFd^] only slight traces remain. Probably to be read so.
1. 5- [?»]• The tail of a letter quite close to }nv» can only be } or n.
No. 21, 1. 2. Sachau suggests r6t33, and refers the fragment to
Behistun.
No. 22. Unimportant.
No. 23. From the Ahikar proverbs?
No. 24. From a contract?
No. 25. Unimportant.
No. 26. Something seems to be written between the lines. Dn32
perhaps a name.
Nos. 27, 28. From contracts.
No. 29. From a letter or list of prisoners in the time of Xerxes, i.e.
before 465 b.c. Cf. no. 34.
No. 65.
Eighteen fragments of legal documents, &c.
Sachau, plate 58. Ungnad, no. 71.
No. 1. ]mwiDl[ No. 2. -i]3 bviA[
]njT NDD3[ ] 13 TOT[
]r jxo Tin[
170
No. 3.
No.
No. 7.
No. 10.
No. 12.
No. 14.
ARAMAIC TAPYRI No. 65
] . jDnn^ ron
]n rn* /// /// /[//
]insn . . , . na[
Jnccn |&n[3 pj]d3 [.
n[ar] n"isd Sunn nn
demotic.
PN[. . . 1]3 H3?[
]rv3[
It
] ■» |Bna[
3>n5[
]n3[
]5aS[
H3]T N2D[3
No. 17.
].T^[
No. 4.
P33 TIK DPBf
ni?3 D7C[
n nnsb
n n ns[
No. 6.
] tota [
3]*3 «5[
No. 8.
Jut k"isd[
No, 9.
]7»[
M
JBn[a
No. 11.
demotic ?
]5dd nw[
No. 13.
]n:3-in[
]n m»[
No. 15.
njnyatw
blank.
No. 16.
Jfe?[
JjS??[
No. 18.
]n-id[d
i]a rwnn[
blank.
No. 2. The end of a document or column. Perhaps from a list
of names.
No. 3 begins with the second line of a document. [rra]^ 13 }nD
cf. 381. [nni]3Dnn^ Sachau.
No. 4. Beginning of a letter.
No. 5. From the first two lines of a contract. , . . n Ungnad
suggests Hoiak, the Egyptian month (*JrV3 in 7218). [iJ^-iN probably.
No. 6. From a contract.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 65 171
No. 7. From a contract to which no. 11 also belongs. They are
combined thus :
]ms*5 . . . ro[
]rre>en ?cn[3 «|]D3[
«3 tsnrm . . . dds] ri[ii] nisd 5unn t5 [, . . , ana
demotic.
bn[. . n]a nil [w . . . nn . . .]5bb "rnc[
. . .] n»a [ ] B»n[M
1. 1. hardly ["i]inx3. 1. 3. Clearly the end of the body of the contract,
giving the scribe's name. But DWnn is feminine. 1. 4 in demotic.
No doubt a witness. Griffith reads on no. 7, 'H-e[-'r-ty-s] i. e. Ah[artais],
Cf. DWnX 632. The demotic on no. 11 is uncertain. 1. 5.
Witnesses' names in their own handwriting. , . . 3£2. Possibly *DU3.
At any rate an Egyptian name. 1. 6. twen[K] cf. 171. But there is
a trace of a letter (n ?) after £>, which is against this reading.
No. 8. Sachau thinks this may belong to nos. 7, 9, n-13, but I
doubt if they are all in the same hand. ttfltatS". The * is very
unusual in form.
No. 9. un, perhaps . . unr or ruinan.
No. 10. Unimportant.
No. it. See under no. 7,
Nos. 12, 13. Unimportant.
No. 14. The writing is unusual. Notes (if so). The N is late.
No. 15. [n]*iy3tJO. Sachau. Witness's name at the end of a deed.
Cf. 219, 323.
No. 16. Unusual writing. Reading quite uncertain.
No. 17. Unimportant.
No. 18. End of a deed. Cf. io22.
No. 66.
Sixteen fragments of legal and similar documents.
Sachau, plate 59. Ungnad, no. 72.
No. 1. ]k»-iaa nne[B> n:r No. 2. ]ne[
n]DB> "1D3DD "13 n[ ]n "13 k[
bjwo p»na Dnnn»]u> n Nna:[ ]3td[
]nf PD |TM[ ] . 3^3 l[
] . b nn:a a[np ] . . . [
blank. blank.
1J2
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 66
No. 3.
No. 5.
No. 7.
No. 9.
No. n.
No. 13.
No. 14.
No. 15.
blank
] i? ncF[
No. 4.
]o V n!?[
]nnj pa[
]W(
lost.
] i"w[
3* r[
] H3K [
J**
No. 6.
]ia maa[
7a l[
]snT3 a[*a
]cnn . [
pj-rao "£[0 w fa
] . "IDS [
J>n5[
]rfc pm ^[0
No. 8.
]/ ftro fr
Nn*]a 3a n[
h]jt NiDD »ajjj
]mBins[
\j33j? rror«
blank.
]7ny d^[
No. 10.
]1W*[
]rrri5pi[
]nwi»[
]3 pi D33r3[
No. 12.
]vu5[
<]niDinn[
">T . 3 D[
]a ///[
in ■
]n"5 ni> n[
3n]5 n / wra p[m»
No. 16.
n]:^a nb pan3n[
... 3 in oai?[
]nj»b N[xn]o jo . n* n. [
v Tn\_
No. 1. From a list of names, perhaps in a letter. 1. 1. TPX^p POT]
1. 2. An Egyptian name. 1. 4. '•11333 as in 3013, 32s.
as in 221, 341.
This is the last line of a column, followed by a blank.
Sachau suggests that nos. 1-3, 5, 6, 9-1 1, 16 all belong to the same
document. The writing of nos. 1, 2, 6 seems to be by the same hand,
but it is not possible to arrange them together with any certainty.
The document may relate to the destruction of the temple at Yeb
(no. 30 &c), and was perhaps a petition to the Persian governor,
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 66 173
recounting the names of the men responsible for the destruction, and
praying for their punishment and for the restoration of the temple.
The foreign names in fragments 1 and 6 agree with this, and the mention
of Cambyses and the (native) king of Egypt imply a reference to the
history of the temple, as in no. 30.
No. 2 is probably part of the same as no. 1. The blank space shows
the relative position of the lines. They are not continuous, but that
is not surprising, if they were as long as in no. 30.
No. 3. Not by the same hand as no. 1. In 1. 3 the surface has
flaked off.
No. 4. From the beginning of a contract relating to barley.
No. 5. Probably not by the same hand as no. 1.
No. 6. See on no. 1. m33 Persian Bagadata (Theodorus). In
324 he has an Egyptian (?) father. The context is the same as in 3013 —
the city of Yeb, the king of Egypt, Cambyses.
No. 7. Subject obscure. The name is Persian. Probably not
p-nnx .
No. 8. From the end of a deed. 'OJy "D }ni wrote io20. n'JTX
cf. 128, 185. The 1 has two strokes, but the writing is rough, and it
may be so.
No. 9. From the beginning of a letter.
No. 10. "idji^ 'to Onophris' (Sachau).
No. 11. Unimportant.
No. 12. D^IDK apparently an Egyptian name. Not D^inX as above.
No. 13. Perhaps from a lease or conveyance, as in 6".
No. 14. Possibly part of the same as no. 13. Cf. 622.
No. 15. From a similar document, giving measurements of a house as
in 84,5. inyE? is certain, and confirms N[yi]E> p. Sachau and
Ungnad read *nyc6, and ascribe the fragment to Behistun.
No. 16. From a contract. . , , : no doubt is part of n: (Sachau).
No. 67.
Eighteen fragments of legal documents, &c.
Sachau, plate 60. Ungnad, no. 73.
No. 1. na]B> *2\yrb[ No. 2. ]ai> ///// a [5
]b mnN[ ]b nr6tyn[
i74 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 67
No. 3. ]brb pflD *»"W ff5[ No. 4. Jn -nb6[
] pa nnna[ }f >»™ M
] nxi^Di nowv[
No. 5. ]22b y\y{ No. 6. ]db "O f[
H3T Wtf p 130 npm[ ]55 12 d5[
n . ] "*[
< « • • •
No. 7. b »[ No. 8. ]PB nff nff
No. 9. ]3t?[ No. 10. Nn];3TD *T //// B*[
] . / nnno[ bw]tA " 7// /7/ "» rust
No. 11. ] pw[K No. 12. ] *iff nns
] D^ [
♦ ♦ « •
No. 13. ]// nun no[ No. 14. ]»n[
]j» '»[ ] . ***[
]=i«[ ]» 1^ . [
ann[ > ^n d[
]n S3[ blank.
No. 15. Iff =j[ No. 16. ]// f?p&[
3™ ha[ ]PW KSD3[
No. 17. ].Nnv[ No. 18. ]nainp^[
No. 1. From the beginning of a contract. HUTO Babylonian name,
probably of the degel, cf. 202.
No. 2. Unusual hand. From a contract? The date ('on the 5th of
P . . .') is not that of the deed, as there are traces of a previous line.
No. 3. p31D 'a man of Syene'. Cf. 2433, 33°. Yethoma and
Selu'a are sisters in i1,2, to which this may refer.
No. 4. From the beginning of a contract. fp if right and a
complete name, cf. 22117.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 6y 175
No. 5. Common form in contracts.
No. 6. Reading uncertain. The hand is like that of some of the
ostraka. Perhaps a list of names.
No. 7. Ends of lines, of a letter ?
No. 8. From a contract. Unusual hand.
No. 9. ' One stater ', cf. 3712 &c.
No. 10. From a contract. [Nfl}:iD (Sachau) is doubtful. The
date, which is fairly certain, is no doubt of Darius II (406 B.C.).
No. 11. Perhaps from a letter.
No. 12. Unusual hand. Otherwise unimportant.
No. 13. Reading and meaning uncertain. The n and U have unusual
forms. Cf. no. 2.
No. 14. Meaning uncertain. From a contract ?
No. 1 5. From the beginning of a letter ?
No. 16. From a contract.
No. 17. Unimportant.
No. 1 8. Note the imperf. of npb without \>.
No. 68.
Twelve fragments of legal documents, letters and accounts. Mostly
with writing on both sides.
Sachau, plate 61. Ungnad, no. 74.
No. 1. Obv.
Rev.
]
nbv NTiipn -jinx nbw[
blank.
h bv
No. 2. Obv.
n^]n jhk Na!>» £[
Rev.
blank.
pb n[
IDT m[a
]»b *3»y n[
No. 3. Obv.
].*>[
Rev.
blank.
]5>N K3[
] - * ft
]nrnn iy[
]..!>.[
]i6) -]&&[
]n..[
Dins rb[
No. 4. Obv.
Rev.
m]a iWBBB nana v[
i7<5
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No
. 68
No. 5.
Obv.
]may n[
]^t fjnra ena[
blank.
Rev.
tt[
blank.
No. 6.
Obv.
] K3»rf S[
]Krun[o
Rev.
]3TS *[
]CDS 3D[
No. 7.
Obv.
]
M
]na f [
S ^n .[
]f6xn[
Rev.
blank.
No. 8.
Obv.
Joins' nno[
Rev.
nn]D innx[
No. 9.
Obv.
]% jnj[
Rev.
*]kid
No. 10.
Obv.
]nii . nna[
Rev.
] "13 pwnnp
;n]:n n Dy[
l
na -pa . [
] pDn pny [
J-pBial . [
No. 11.
Obv.
flncn par
] . Synxa
///3
Rev.
1 p5n . ... ^ . [
No. 12.
Obv.
iT^ay
Rev. ] .
nnrus xnriifc n n[-i"
]"P3
]m«
jab
life
]^a
No. 1. From a letter. NTflpJl is strange, mpn is known as a name.
Reverse mostly obliterated.
No. 2. From a contract. If B> is right (as Sachau) it might belong to
Xerxes, Artaxerxes, or Darius. One of the parties was a woman (as
shown by "OKiy), and according to the endorsement, a daughter of Zaccur.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 68 177
No. 3. Obscure.
No. 4. From a contract. The name is evidently [rpn]t33D, which is
spelt 'oQO in the endorsement. There is nothing to show whether this
was the notorious daughter of Mahseiah.
No. 5. From a letter or contract ?
No. 6. Unimportant.
No. 7. Obscure. In 11. 3 and 4 7RM ?
No. 8. From a letter to nnD from her brother. The name may be
short for 7NH)"lD, which is known.
No. 9. From a letter ?
No. 10. From a contract? ply, if right, = Heb. jmy. Reverse,
names (of witnesses?). Sachau's "WOJ is probable.
No. n. Accounts, cf. 61. Beginnings of lines. 1. 2. [j]lttn a
name(?). Or pen as in 54s'11 ? 1. 4. The date is added in the margin.
1. 5. bl introducing a total. Rev. 1. 1. pen or p»n as obv. 1. 2.
1. 2. W nrHO as in 24s6 'district of Thebes'. Not 'our city' (as
Sachau).
No. 12. Beginnings of lines from a report. 1. 3. , . mx a Persian
name. Reverse, endorsement, as in contracts, but written at right
angles to the obverse. The name is uncertain.
The following (nos. 69-78) have been already published in the CIS.
They are all fragmentary and very difficult to interpret. They are
reprinted here for the sake of completeness because they evidently
belong to the same period and class as the documents from Elephantine.
Moreover the discovery of the better preserved texts has thrown light on
some points which were previously obscure. As they have been carefully
edited in the CIS a full commentary is unnecessary here. Only diver-
gences from the views taken there will be noted.
No. 69.
Six fragments, not all belonging to the same document. B is certainly
in a different hand from the rest.
Ungnad suggests that they are part of a story. They may, however,
belong to a letter or petition or report narrating one of the many
troublesome incidents in the history of the colony. The reading through-
out is very uncertain and the fragments are too much broken to admit of
translation. They were first published by Lepsius in his Denkmaler,
vol. xii, pi. 124, and afterwards in CIS ii, 1, 149. From the character
t6'J» N
178
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 69
of the writing it seems that they belong to the same period as the rest of
these texts, and that they probably came from Elephantine.
Fragment A is in two columns.
Sachau, plate 51. Ungnad, no. 64. CIS. ii, 1, no. 149, plate xix.
A
]v mnn^ .... 1
JfinnsjDD by bbv [nnx
pa[ 2
]nn« n»s p[
. » . . • 3
*
]l WJDJO . « .• . M
W»[ 4
]5a ny wpatf ^
♦a pen . k[ 5
« . . « s
6
]5fl 55n lhl , . &5
£i55 i5b>[ 8
]ir6x 'aionn nb.oi
n *an3[ 9
]mnn^ aw n . , a
?i? na nvrns[ 10
*»
\bcn \/t nnop vM3
"T nn . . . "in nin»N[ 11
]n:ri3 ^x
rh nan* laxa n^jt
ttirbt&[ 1 2
] rmwai |pp£
.... ^ ... , p3B>[ 13
B
p
C F
n]c« p ien
n]inc[K
]i2b nbv . . . .
yb ibv
]n //->
]ma n . . . .
]S Nwa
]l?S
]b ml
]T5y
]^ . . k Niri
E ]!? //
ni
]?un
]■*
]n S*i3 -ion
A, col. ii.
1 he will show . . . 2 /^?/ he spoke to Petenefhotep
thus he
said, They seized . . . 4 . . . and imprisoned him and . . 5 they did not
let him go till ... 6 7 8 in the gate ? of 9 . . . 10 . . . given
to Thoth ... u 3 and he will speak to ... 12 which I did not
give to him as payment ; also I gave . . . 13 to WSSN and his com-
panions.
The rest does not admit of translation.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 69 179
Col. ii, 1. 4. TinDST (Ungnad) seems the only way of making a word
of it, but the N1 is very doubtful. 1. 8. bbi very uncertain. Hardly
&D. 1. 10. ninr6. The Egyptian god Thoth rather than the month.
1. 11. \// probable. Ungnad C 1. 13. \wrb a name ' to W.'
No. 70.
Beginning of a letter. Cf. 301 and often.
CIS. ii, 1, no. 144, plate xv.
tb~p D^riD -\12V ncnnnn \s-ib b$ 1
•vjrv '"in-' '•n-id nt-i^i mn ton 2
1 To my lord Mithravahisht, your servant Pahim, greeting . . . 2 Living,
happy and prosperous may my lord be exceedingly . . .
Line 1. nKVmn» a Persian name. ' Mithra is best'. [D?]ti>. There
is a trace of the B\ The line was probably long, and continued chw
py ban ?nb* k"dp nta "-n-id.
Line 2. XTl with NT~lK>1 mn is best taken as in CIS 'vivus', but the
emphatic forms are strange. ,N"1D not vocative, but subject of ^I.T.
f\TY> is jussive, not a mere by-form of mrp. ["I',]n> c^- 3°3- The n
is certain, not p.
No. 71.
Two fragments, perhaps belonging to the same text, which no doubt
was a story. Apparently Bar Punes had done some meritorious service
for which he was suitably rewarded by the king.
CIS. ii, 1, no. 145, plate xvi.
A. Recto.
D]rfc Dn[3D]a too"1 ah)
]np far ny Dnn»np
]b3Ns p-inx jovai
j]an wmb npnv
~\b b^« bapi nzbi ^n^prvi
]hn"i6 >33 mi rnBM runo
]na \l//^3 pp
N 2
1
2
r[
3
*[
4
*m[
5
♦ • *
6
nva[
7
8
9
180 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 71
A. Verso.
y]ocn Naina n tnnDn bv *aa^[ 10
]sata my nnx in twia na [ n
ray]i ion xata »? n^o smib na [ 12
]rn "j^n anna inn ton r6o[p 13
~\timv «n n*3^ n jcaen if $n» i[ 1 4
]T^di hw pnn* «i> td-ui -^N3[ 15
|n]WD3 1 sata laiw i?y 6?[3ia -13 16
B. Recto.
]njyoi pyn n3^d[ 17
]nnp n mr[ 18
*]mni> may na p »nAn[n 19
*nn]fop [n]o» nnxa vb\b[ 20
d]puoi »KDna tnnycf 21
Jnnpm inn i[r 22
]nny bt6i \nbvt oy n[ 23
]pin« [jovai] . . 3 . 3v[ 24
B. Verso.
]*ni3N n$> jn? n [ 25
n] pmso »nbn up[jan*» 26
]piw p[*b 27
JSi snpns naSni no[ 28
]e«n pajnSi id[ 29
]tbo naoa nan^y ty[ 30
h] nnap^ fnaaf 31
]»jyn rb jncN^[ 32
]h i^n . . . I^Q3 nm[ 33
1 And he shall not fill their belly with bread . . . 2 every man the
sufferings of their fathers . . . 3 before them until they should build
a c\ty (?)... 4 And in after days he shall eat . . . 5 righteousness to his
father, and shall sell . . . 6 And he shall weigh it in his heart (?) and one
shall kill ... 7 his lord, and one shall set free the sons of his lord . . .
8 bread, and the gods of Egypt shall be assembled ... 9
44 years . . .
10 to my sons concerning the testimony (?) of the king and he
heard ... u it was Bar Punes. Then the king answered
• •
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 71 181
12 Bar Punes the words which the king said and he answered . . .
13 thou hast killed them, thou shalt go with the sword of thy
troops, and ... u ... he shall make up for(?) this, and the prisoners
whom thou hast captured this year ... 15 ... in these, and thy bones
shall not go down to the grave, nor thy spirit ... 16 . . . Bar Punes1 over
the hosts of the king, and set him among the officers . . .
17 . . . the king, and he cried out and measured (?)... 18 . . . this which
happened . . . 19 . . . thou shalt hang him. Thus as thou didst to his sons . . .
20 . . . unless (?) in a place by the sea thou hast killed him 21 . . . ? ? ?
22 . . . this, thou shalt go and drink ... 23 . . . with (the) gods, and he
whispered, help . . . 2i and in after days . . .
25 . . . which his father shall give him ... 26 ... the gods of Egypt shall
be assembled, who ... 27 . . . Egy\>l, and they shall be . . . 28 . . . and
righteousness shall perish ... 29 . . . and the man was taken out . . .
30 ... on account of his money ... 31 ... his body to its grave, and . . .
32 . . . and they shall speak to him and he shall answer ... ^
for half ....
Line 2. '•Ta. One would expect "axa, if it means ' pains '. Drvms
is more probable than DPPn?N. Cf. pTOK 'our fathers' 3013.
Line 3. Dnnolp. CIS Drvcp, but the spaces are too large for \ Cf.
in»np 'before you' Ahikar 101. . . 1p CIS [iY»]-)p.
Line 4. 'ns* }OV21. Cf. Ahikar 39, 52 &c.
Line 6. n5?2. The 2 is more like a 1.
Line 7. mt^l may mean 'set free' (CIS) but? Above the line are
the letters 23, faint, palimpsest?
Line 10. NViDn CIS 'testimonium', but the root is always written
with {? in these texts. The 1 might be a 3.
Line n. in belongs to what precedes, and inx begins a new sentence,
as e. g. in Ahikar passim.
Line 13. T^Tl 3*1113 CIS 'with the sword of thy strength'. Perhaps,
rather ' with the sword of thy troops ' i. e. with thy armed forces, addressed
to the king.
Line 14. ibrp very uncertain. "jl CIS 1^». NnJP NT3 cf. 213.
Line 15. )inrT» with an accusative as in 427, but in 4211 with 7.
?1NB> is certain. It does not occur elsewhere in these texts. j??\2
thy shadow i. e. thy spirit or soul.
Line 16. 'thx more likely 'thousands' than 'officers', as CIS. [jn]VJtD3.
CIS takes it as a name. The restoration adopted here would be suitable,
if the word is possible in Aramaic.
Line 17. FiS'DI fairly certain. Perhaps 'measured' cf. 94, rather than
' anointed '.
Line 18. mp (CIS Nip by a slip), no doubt 'happened'.
Line 19. V3 p probably begins a new sentence.
1 8a ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 71
Line 20. N?17 CIS 'nisi' as later. But 1? 'if in these texts seems to
occur only in the compound 17 jn. Perhaps it Is a noun. The lost letter
preceding it looks like V. Or is it N7 17 |n ? ]?Bp [k]0* is more probable
than CIS 7DP"1 D\ NO' "inN3 like Heb. en H3H03 ' a place by the sea '.
Line 21. D~irw. So CIS. The "1 is more like D, but 3 is possible.
Line 22. nfiKTll. The second n is fairly certain. CIS H7BT11.
Line 24. }3" are clear, and nns probable, which suggests JGV31 before it.
Line 26. 1t?[J3J"p] as in 1. 8. >T printed as certain in CIS, is not
visible on the facsimile.
Line 29. ID . . , CIS 13 , . ,
Line 30. new IsFby. CIS [<]t ni33 n3 "]7J?, but the names are not
known. Reading very uncertain.
Line 31. fn3B doubtful. CIS pm^] is hardly possible. nn3p7 (or
rt73p7). Probably a noun rather than infin. Pael. ... 71 printed as
certain in CIS, is not visible on the facsimile.
Line 32. "OjrT CIS nyx, but 3 is more probable than n.
Line 33. "]7n not a Hebraism for inn, which is used in 1. 22.
No. 72.
Fragment, written on both sides, containing accounts for wine,
evidently referring to a private household rather than to a trade.
There are parts of two columns on either side, but the right-hand
column in each case is nearly all lost. The lines were short, and each
as a rule contained a single complete entry.
CIS does not say where the papyrus was found. It may not have
come from Elephantine. The writing is not like that of the other
documents, and is perhaps somewhat later, but as it is no doubt the
work of a man who was not a professional scribe, it is not easy to judge.
CIS. ii, 1, no. 146, plate xvii.
*bnb m»a nnpsj
]p*m> \"a7p }tv "inn Nmtj6 '•bnb? v3
// p37p v 7i7p p-rco Knnp? ^kz1? 1 1 3
]///// pND p-M3 nnn nDB 13 Nm?7 3VI
=)B> 1VI T?J? /// p37P // }7l7p 133
\ 717P p[ns]D nny nip ybv ?.3[
\ 717P r*rc»[
\ ^37p p*D K?.t"[
3iTn» ST ,|BK3[
I
2
\^37p jnxe[
3
|l P37P \ 7l7p p[nVO
4
5
6
7
8
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 72 183
\W>P p»D . . M '*?[
•
9
]pve vj^p jtx ion Kmi'^[
10
\W>p pro nns -i3[
1 1
\ bb[? p»D NmtpJ[
B.
\ '3^p \ ^p Nfn^ /// "3 3
12
13
1 1 ?2bp \ naab \/// -3 a
14
\ ^p Nan sn^s insN mp ri»pab
15
\wp ktwipk »dn rrpab
16
va^p pnt nnn «ma6
mn[
17
1 1 (rbp xmvh ~n:b nv in n irvab // Mi a
v[
18
]m onp ////// -3 a
\*
^P[
19
]S5vT:n i^y
20
]!> |l III III -33
v[
21
> |ll III III-33
V[
22
]ni? »anny
Nnve[
23
*
24
25
A. Col. i.
1 . . . Paophi, which was given out 2
3 . . . wine of Egypt, kelbi 1. 4 . . . wine of Egypt, kelul 1, kelbi 2.
Col. ii.
1 Expenses in the month of Paophi : 2 On the 1st of Paophi for dinner,
wine of Sidon, kelbi 1, Egypt(ian) . . . 3 On the 2nd of Paophi for
dinner, Egypt(ian), kelul 1, kelbi 2 4 Given to Zeho b. Pamuth, wine of
Egypt 5 bottles 6 containing kelul 2, kelbi 3, for you ... 6 for
you before 'Ahor, Egyptian), kelul 1. 7 Egypt(ian), kelul 1.
8 Egypt(ian), kelbi 1. 9 Egypt(ian), kelul 1.
10 for dinner, wine of Sidon, kelbi 1, Egypt(ian) ... n
b. Peha, Egypt(ian), kelul 1. 12 "for dinner, Egypt(ia?i), ke\v\ 1.
B. Col. i, nothing important.
Col. ii.
13 On the 23rd for dinner, kelul 1, kelbi 1. u On the 24th to
Bagadeva(?) 1, kelbi 2. 15 For a purification before Apuaitu, the great
god, kelbi 1. 16 For a purification before Isis the goddess, kelbi 1.
17 For dinner, wine of Sidon, kelbi 1. 18 On the 25th of Khoiak, which
was the day of a vow, for dinner, kelul 2. 19 On the 26th before . . .
20 For you ... 21 On the 28th for dinner ... 22 On the 29th for
dinner ... 23 Ahornufi ... 24 For dinner ... 25 For . . .
184 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 72
Line 1. nrvnD more probably than arono (CIS). The end is blotted.
As it is at the end of the line, the sentence must have continued in 1. 2,
probably with T3 'given into the hand of. nnpB3 translated 'ex-
penses ' is rather ' what was served out '.
Line 2. Hff\*W? perhaps as CIS 'pro prandio '. }"P¥. We have
corroboration of the large trade in Syrian jvine in the numerous jar-
handles bearing Phoenician names published by Sachau on pi. 69 sqq.
*2?p only found in this papyrus.
Line 4. 3TI if not a mistake, must be a popular form for 3\T .
Line 5. 133 as elsewhere frequently. CIS f]33, but the use of 133 was
unknown at the time. The end of the line is quite unintelligible.
Line 6. The first word looks like ^>33 or ^23 (?). ybv ' on your
account ' i. e. for the master to whom the return is made. nny CIS
the Egyptian god. If so, it was an offering, and Egyptian wine was
used. But this is doubtful.
Line 8. CIS Ml.
Line 11. nns as a name occurs in 402.
Reverse.
Line 14. •\li2b (not }V) a Persian name compounded with baga ?
CIS "1133^.
Line 15. inQK must be a god-name.
Line 16. *DX not very clear, but must be so. Nnn7N CIS T)3*1
would not be used in this Aramaic. The last letter is almost certainly n.
The first letter is probably N, and there is room for rh, though it is
hardly legible. Cf. rmrbn 145.
Line 17. ri3n is certain. Not as CIS.
Line 20. S5"n3N CIS n3113N. Very uncertain.
Lines 21, 22. Supply probably [NmtJ>p.
Line 23. NnSs rather than NWS (CIS). Meaning?
No. 73.
Fragments of accounts, perhaps by one hand, put together without
regard to their original position. Owing to their lack of connexion they
present little of interest except the names, which, however, are not always
legible. They are all Egyptian, so that the use of Aramaic is remarkable,
unless the steward was a foreigner (Jew ?).
CIS. ii, 1, no. 147, plate xviii.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 73 185
Dn»Sn H///i-wi*>\/\//W/vb>/"ZZ 3
e>so i> . . 5i> sdnod -12 »snroyS> 3[\t 4
fryb lj -9-^*»//\//\// 5
■» »y"I ^>33 15 6
... 2 myiv "rb . . ne>B3 nps[: 7
N^Dn 0 ma Kirb aw 8
T^i ^"abi sb ''dndd "12 D3nn:y[b 9
// . . . DUP 12 U3WW6 ..3io
ftnavft 13 ... 02 12 tannannias^ n
tra \//-> P3DDSJ^ LJ 12
// ill -3^1 »yi ibwmp na kdob^ "yi 13
NJ1JHO npQJ 14
-3-^ *yn Djnos^ lj bw 15
■3-3-3 iD^an "13 Yrnntcb lj 16
////-9*> \l\ll \ll -»y-| b 17
1 ? ? ? 2 He is the servant. 3 23885 ... 4 Given to 'Anhhapi b.
Petisi ... 5 ... 850 6 ... in all 10 re'i. 7 Personal expenses : ...
will be done ... 8 Given to Tebo daughter of 9 To 'Anhhabis
b. Petisi. To me and to my son and to . . . (?) 10 To Sahpimu b.
Senut". . . 2. n To Peteharpohrat b. Pet . v. .... 12 LJ to Neftisobku
... 13 ... 13 re'i. To Pemeso b. Sahpimu, 125 re'i. u Town
expenses : 15 LJ to Petehnum 60 re'i. IG LJ to Ahrehib b. Hapimu 60.
17 Total re'i 814.
Line 1. ~{?V, cf. 7vb]} 781. I do not know the word. KDJ3 cf. 1. 8.
It looks like WB33. CIS ' ratio corporum viritim '.
Line 2. ND^[y] probable. CIS only D. in. A side-stroke is missing.
Hence CIS U.
Line 3. *(? for pj^K as in the Behistun text.
Line 7. 'Expenses for himself (ipse, the master) i.e. personal
expenses.
Line 9. '31 "b very faint and uncertain.
Line 10. BMP probable. CIS BVVi.
Line n. 'ntasb. The S is really a 3.
Line 12. 'b& or 'bb^ b.
Line 15. D^nDsb possible, but it is more like DIHDB^ as CIS.
1 86
No. 74.
Fragment of a list of names, all probably Egyptian.
CIS. no. 148, plate xv.
xp.n na^e »bpb na sbb i
... :n aSya nn n[»]fi "in -)£>»D3 2
. . . [n]aa na pa 3
nomy na moo 4
^dndb 12 vnn 5
tJNOB "13 DJn 6
1 Peti b. Pahapi, his half is . . . 2 Pasmasak b. Paw?/th b. Ne'ezab,
in. . . . 3 Pamen b. Ban?'/ ... 4 Smitu b. 'Anhmuth. 5 Hadiu b. Petisi.
6 Hons b. Petisi.
Line 1. Np.n CIS Knm, but the 1 might be "l, "I or 3. The p is
more probable than n, cf the n in 11. 4, 6.
Line 2. n[o]B. A O is the most likely letter to fill the space. Cf. 72*.
3Yy3 CIS 3XtM, neither very probable names.
Line 4. The final n is partly visible.
Line 5. "inn. CIS eft. mn, but ? *DKDB. Traces of '•D are visible.
No. 75.
Fragment, very difficult. It can hardly be taken as in CIS.
The stroke after 1. 5, and the summing up with 73 are both charac-
teristic of accounts. The reading of )bw$ is certain (1. 5), and if this has
its ordinary meaning, the papyrus would seem to contain an inventory of
a plantation.
CIS. ii, 1, no. 150, plate xx.
. . . yjpip inoa rom-i 1
. . . Nnfhp jptMrn 2
ypn]p jnoa nnSnx 3
Nm]-ip nnDpnpB 4
. . .-'■9 i?CN b_ 5
. . . ncN »jn 6
. . . f]7B»K n3D3"l 7
. . . \n runns 8
. . . ]]b[m] 7[3 9
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 75 187
Translation quite uncertain.
Line 1. nanan as in 1. 7. CIS ' domina tua', but the suffix never has
this form in the papyri. It can hardly be a Hebraism. yn03 as
in 1. 3, where it might be yDCQ. Hardly y)V2 'east', or = F10
' narrow ' ? y]p"lp> . CIS trip is hardly possible. It might be , . nip.
Line 2. W»jm a name? for n^OJn cf. ^NDJn Jer. 327 &c. Or cf. tain
('frost'?) in Ps. 7847.
Line 3. nn5nx so CIS. The second letter is not like n, and the 2 is
more like D.
Line 4. 'npQ an Egyptian name compounded with nna.
Line 6. "on perhaps like Dm ' again ', beginning a new series.
Line 9 probably as 1. 5 ' total, tamarisks . . .'
No. 76.
Fragment of a report of legal proceedings. Very little can be read
with certainty on the facsimile, so that the text is for the most part that
of CIS.
CIS. ii, 1, no. 151, plates xx and xxi.
. . ♦ *jr snv t . . ton pi //-» n ^b . . . ids ly onm . . . 1
, ny
. •■ O? Nnv ni3 ? . . , . eon nniaai n . , , 2
. . . nja wk[b!>]-> ovn n^[n]^ ir Nnv n . . . 3
. . . Dy . b rbmn by jn 4
1 . . . seal, till ... 12 r and thus they (?) said to you : this Zeho . . .
before 2 . . . and his colleagues . . . was done to . . . daughter (?) of this
Zeho ... 3 . . . this Zeho to Yedoniah (?) on the 10th day of Paiim,
now ... 4 . . . will give, on the petition of
Line 1. no& J3 //"> 1 restored from pi. xxi. Possibly it was "p 1"IDX,
in which case there may have been another name after "]T xnV. At
the end perhaps Dnp.
Line 2. "I . , . the end of a name. fn5 very doubtful.
Line 3. ns:[l]^. It is doubtful if 1 would fill the space. ^'[s^].
As V)l is clear, this is more probable than ''SNS? (CIS), but the name
does not occur for certain elsewhere.
Line 4. jn . . . part of jnj.
1 88
No. yy.
Small fragment of the beginning of a letter.
CIS. ii, i, no. 152, plate xx.
. . . »K"lO D^P I
. . . n]on *in D^y 2
Reverse.
... by nan ... 3
1 The welfare of my lord ... 2 A servant there . . .
Line 1. *tnQ is certain. Not N3"l as CIS.
Line 2. D^y probable, though the y has an unusual form.
Line 3 apparently the address.
No. 78.
Fragment of accounts, very difficult to read on the facsimile.
CIS. ii, 1, no. 153, plates xx and xxi.
Obverse.
. . . m]'a naby 1
193 2
. . . \//\//tt> e]D3 3
. . . . \\ fb[p]B> *|D3 ^3 5
. . . VTQ S)D3 ^3 6
1 Accounts in the mwrt . . . 2 including 3 the sum of 6 shekels . . .
4 the value of 1 1 1 1 . . . s total money, shekels 2 . . . 6 total money,
karash . . .
Line 1. ruby cf. 731, but the reading in both places is uncertain. It
must mean ' accounts '.
Line 2. 193 is now certain.
Line 4. >»n is probable, but does not seem suitable.
Line 5. jb[p]tP is more probable than the CIS reading.
Line 6. VTO (or plural) is no doubt right. The word was not known
to CIS.
The reverse is illegible.
i89
No. 79.
Fragment found at Elephantine near the site of the temple. It is not
included in Sachau's volume. As there is no facsimile the text is printed
here as in Ungnad's edition.
Cf. also De Vogue in Repertoire, 246 ; Clermont-Ganneau in Recueil
vi, p. 246; Lidzbarski, Ephemeris ii, p. 217.
It seems to be part of an inventory or specification. Cf. no. 26.
Ungnad, no. 89.
, , , /[///] p|VJa rhn / pick tis //-» ;bn rnn tia 2
. . . n]nn / pidn >na ji?sn /// /// /// ion mn« n^ wa 3
. , . p]cra mn [/ nojx *ib // /// j»n mn[«] rvb 4
1 . . . . 2 including one of i 2 cubits, one cubit wide, 4 (?) hands
thick (?)... 3 including another board of 9 cubits and a half, 1 cubit
wide, . . . thick (?) . . . 4 another board of 5 cubits, 1 cubit wide, . . . hands
thick (?)
Line 1 is illegible.
Line 2. mn must be a third dimension, 'thickness'. Ungnad eft.
S"Vn ' circumference '. This cannot be the exact sense here since the
object was 1 cubit wide. The thing is no doubt a rv6, whatever that
is (as in 11. 3, 4), not a single plank, but a flat surface of some kind.
No. 80.
Fragment found with no. 79. The writing is on both sides. There is
no facsimile, so that I have adopted here the readings of Clermont-
Ganneau (Recueil vi, p. 246), as printed by Ungnad. See alsoDe Vogue",
Repertoire 247; Lidzbarski, Ephemeris ii. p. 219. The text is too
fragmentary to give any connected sense. It seems to be a report of
some incident concerning the garrison from which legal proceedings
resulted.
Ungnad, no. 90.
. . . a by 1
n]ia in n[o]« 2
. DnniN» »a[n]i ttrb . . 3
. . . *jvk vb [b^n m-in 4
. . p]Dno Tin [mi] N^n 5
. ^n kt S[n]T3 jj« *i« 6
190 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 80
Reverse.
. . . rrnno [n»]S p jy^ 7
. . . b now iran DruN 8
Nno[b] fnr 9
1 To B . . . 2 they said ... 3 ... to them, and their centurions . . .
4 his sword, there is no force . . . 5 this force, they were holders of . . .
G Now also this fortress (?)...
7 Now thus says Mithradates . . . 8 you, judges, say to . . . 9 he will give
to my lord (?)
Line 3. '"INO H3[l]l no doubt ' heads of their hundreds' i. e. centurions
as Ungnad suggests. Cf. '3 nxo 2220 &c.
Line 5. [p]DTO for pDnno, is not very convincing. #
Line 8. nDX imperative.
Line 9. NnD[i>] read *NTB7 ? There was probably something after it.
The next three papyri are later than those from Elephantine.
No. 81.
This was published in PSBA, 1907, p. 260, with facsimiles. The
papyrus was bought by Sayce, with other fragments, from a dealer at
Luxor who believed them to have come from Kus. It was given by Sayce
to the Bodleian Library where it is referenced as MS. Aram. a. 1 (P). It
consists of two long strips about 20 X z\ inches (and some fragments).
The writing is on both sides and is divided into 10 columns running
down the width of the papyrus. Originally no doubt the two fragments
were united along the long edge and the columns were continuous across
both. Probably something is lost between the fragments (i. e. in the
middle of each column) but hardly anything at the top or bottom. The
document evidently began with 1. 1. The columns are not always kept
distinct, but sometimes run into one another where the lines are long.
The lines often slope, so that the beginning or end is occasionally lost.
These two defects make the decipherment more than usually difficult.
The difficulty is further increased by the unskilful writing, by the broken
condition of the papyrus, by the condensed and disconnected nature of
the entries, by the abbreviations and by apparent inconsistencies of
the writer.
No date is given, but the many Greek names suggest the Ptolemaic
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 81 191
period, and this is corroborated by the character of the writing, which
shows a much later stage of development than that of the Elephantine
documents. It is unlikely, however, that Aramaic survived, even in
individual cases, long after the time of Alexander, and we shall perhaps
not be far wrong in assuming a date about 300 b. c.
With regard to particular letters, N, 3, n, b, V have practically arrived
at the ordinary square shape : 3 has much the same form as in the
Elephantine documents : 1 and n are still indistinguishable : r is difficult
to distinguish from the unit \ : 3 and 3 when medial, have the tail bent,
but when final, it is straight : in O the right-hand stroke turns round,
thus approximating to the square form : D shows the most pronounced
change, being sometimes nearly joined below, as in the square form : p
only requires a longer tail to give it the square form : n much as at
Elephantine, but the left-hand stroke is shorter.
The text consists of accounts, not of a household (like no. 72), but
apparently of a business of some kind. Many entries seem to relate to
wine, others perhaps to money-lending, but the precise meaning of most
of them is obscure.
A peculiarity of this document is the way of writing the numerals. In
a series of units the last one or two or three are written sloping against
the preceding stroke, e. g. \\\///, but almost <?fl. In the PSBA, not
having found this arrangement before, I printed it as <?// &c, and took
it to represent a fraction, e.g. 3§. It is, however, simply a way of
writing 6, &c. (////// at Elephantine), due perhaps rather to a personal
fancy of the writer than to a later method. This value is proved by the
ratio regularly preserved (where the reading is certain) between the
number of ]& and the number of 1. Thus in 1. 62 \\\ 13 \\\/// pb,
' 6 bottles at (i. e. costing ?) 3 r '. Whatever the meaning is, it will be
found that 2 bottles always correspond to 1 r, if the units are read as here
suggested.
Another obscure combination is B\0. This must in some way mean
one half. Cf. 11. 96-98, where (if 2 bottles = 1 r) 5 bottles should be
valued (?) at z\ r, 3 bottles at i-| r, and 1 bottle at \ r. As a mere con-
jecture I suggest that S may be for ai?Q and that E may be for ?]D1D
'added' (the perfect Hophal occurs in Dan. 433) or some such word.
The whole will then be equivalent to +^ (r6s I ^DID?).
The *l here, as elsewhere, is for mi ' quarter ' (of a shekel). This is
shown by 1. 94 where 9 bottles should at the same rate be valued at 4^ r.
and the text has 'at 1 sh(ekel)+£ (r)'. Therefore 1 shekel = 4 r or
quarters.
i9a ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 81
Col. a.
\-qk .... nana n wasy ppn i
\ -i \ d |ttan n"nar "T Nnava pvo^ 2
s \ \/// /// p \ d joan rrnap ma n"nacy 3
\\ -> n joan pcnS 4
. . . K \ T&F [P]mx 32 5
6
xw//////-» ^ , , j5[-u] 7
\ 11a Nana pn" // pna py[ot!> jo] 8
\ ana \ jna |o \\ P"u a"E>" *na» 10 9
\\ para Dnsn "an 10 10
. . by \ n \\\ n """Siva rran ma Nan 1 1
ma.D pn k • • • • 12
Col. b.
Col. c.
13
raw fnav "va snot? 14
"an na pyop k5sk^» pbo 15
•3-3 jxnona \ not? "not? aa 16
w -» janaa \ not? pyop aa 1 7
w//////tr 18
■*» \/// j[ma] \ no^ pyot? aa 19
ahiD \/// \nbr12 \ no|>] |[iyoE> aa] 20
sine \y~> pnm 21
"?"*»\ jnta \ -»oe> mar innay 22
-> n joana \ noc nia? mnay aa 23
nn"aa \ not? jnn "an "nas> 24
\\// -3 a joana \ not? "an "naa> aa 25
. . . y "^i "13 jan" \[n]op rrra 26
*>\ pna 27
n"aa.. na ""n" pn] soan jna[i"] T3 28
pen "r \\\///nD»:n jnav Ta 29
spa "r w "jnna -» epa "r n^an 30
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 81
193
Col. d.
Col. e.
verso, Col. f.
\\ en *i:ry nn tbm n vem in: T3 31
nro w^r K3"i nam nTa fa Nam 32
[h]tsb> n . . na 7iT3 N^Tn rvra Nan 33
, , . fprp n nt . . . . nr3 34
. . . rn]<3 35
\ n \\ n [53n 36
. . rwn rna .Dna5 btu n xcnn n["i*3] 37
k . . *s»3 n:^t wnn rrra 38
3
Nin5 ♦ . , bw N*r KH3P £n* un» n Nnon 39
, , , an ' \\ pana ^>n \ -3 Tdncd3 40
, . , ♦ \^n v\\///"^^53 ja tny? »ih 41
\\\ jana was n!>T»3 42
\ ^n \\\/// pa na ons wiap 43
*»\ inf »3TO 44
. , . n nivb nn . . n 45
. . . \ n Tn \/// . . n 46
. . . // nan pyv . . n$> 47
. . . nq \\\///n[a-i] pyv 48
, . , nnp *in abn . . . . 49
... 3 \\/// n* ♦ 5» ♦ ♦ . 50
. . . TDp 51
1 Nn 52
n5 53
n 54
*r 55
pa Ttann 56
\n \\//3^^ 57
P N 58
P 59
N33N3 N*ymN 60
\ P 1NP \\ n \ P3 \ N3 => 3 61
2599
194 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 81
B \ 5 IKt^ \\\ 13 \\\/// ])b D"33 62
\ 1XB> \\\ 13 \\\/// pb D'33 33 63
\ 1 \\ B>3 B \ K3 |fr D^BX 64
\\ "13 \\ \\ |A^ K»3V" 65
. . , . p$> IP3V^ 66
\ 13 67
\\\ "13 \\\/// Ja£>] .... 68
\\ pb PUN 69
a\»3 \;6 *3i3 jn5 70
• a\o \ 13 \\\ pi> kw-"' 71
\\\ 13 \\\/// )ib D*M 33 72
. . , & UNf^ 73
Col. g.
\\\ 13 \\\/// p? D33^ 74
\\ n3 \/// pi> tx>y^ 75
\\\ 13 \\\/// ]& WM 33 76
\\ 1 1KE> 77
\ 13 \\ ]& rmnv^ 78
B\0 \ jfc D'OJ 33 79
\i3 \\ pb K*av^ 80
. , . 3 B\N3 JM*-"" 81
♦ . ntron 3U3 83
\ 13 \\ ]J? DIID^ 84
\\ 1 \ K>3 \ N3 DIB^" 85
\\\ 13 :6a vbinn^ 86
B\» \\\ 13 \\\//// JJ& DpOD^ 87
\\\ 13 \\//// p& DnD3^ 88
\\ 13 \/// pi? diibi^" 89
\\\ 13 ... . pnj ww 90
Col. h.
3 TP3N 91
\\ 13 . \/// p6 DIID*^ 92
\V\ 13 \\V/// pb 8TO^ 93
B\tt \B>3 \\\////// p^J D^33^" 94
Col. i
Col. k.
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 81 395
\ 13 \\ ]ib aw^ 95
a x d w "in \///l pb rnin^ 96
D\» \ 13 \W P^5 K*3*^ 97
a\m \a^ bnm^ 98
. . . . £ 5E» H3y-^ 99
\\13 \/// [p!?] 100
\\ 13 [x/]// )ib [tt]F 101
V\ 13 \/// Jjfc '•DDB^' 102
\\\ 13 ////// pb Tna^" 103
\\ 13 \/// |5^> KW''' 104
\ 13 \\ }& niBK" 105
\\\///D
1NB> XXX t^3 \\ }N3 ins 3 106
B\0 \ l[3] /// }ib DVDIK^" 107
...» 108
\\///ynvb . i?p* sw n^33 109
jnna \\ }oni3 \\ fnybv wiw5 no
tib n Kn»n ^y on* n iwra m
\// e> \\\\/// jena 0323 nt Nn3ty 1 1 2
\ pa \\/// /// $ ma 33^ 1 1 3
erased {*W xx/// /7/ ^ \\ 13 XX ^ ma 33^ 114
-^ . 13 x//^ tfaijK . . . rona^ wate^ 115
f 4 , , 3 116
XX 13 x/// []ib] , . . . 117
K3fl . . . . 3n IMP . . . 118
, . non "Di D'aa ^na 119
XXX B> 120
. . . n d»33 na ♦ . . 121
nmnb -» "3 122
X (erasure) 1 123
\ -1 x///-^ ;m 124
125
axis x 13 xxx [\:b] bniDD^" 126
0 2
196 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 81
\/// ]ib mn Tnty-^ \\ -» pb njx 127
\\ -13
\///}37 flJK 23 128
//////$ nac 33 129
\\\///p^ njN 33 ve>a 130
\\ 1 ^[P V\] 13 \ B> \ K3 D^3^ \\ 13 131
\\\ i lac \[\\ p]5 \\-» p rmm^" v\ -13 132
\/// \ib [pun] 33 w 13 133
Col. 1.
V D j[u]jn3 \\ 134
\c III 135
v d fiara \\\ 136
\ 0 \\ 1 137
*w \\ 138
1 Account of the produce which Abihi wrote . . . 2 (daughter of)
Shelamzin : the farm of Zebadiah, wheat i seah i quarter. 3 Shabtith
daughter of Obadiah, wheat i seah, 7 . . . i half (?) 4 Arsin
wheat, 1 2 ardabs. 5 . . . Arsz'/z 1 bond ... 6
7 flagons . . . mine, 9. 8 From Simeon 2 flagons. Johanan the
priest 1 flagon. 9 From Shabbethai (daughter of) Yashib 2 flagons from
Nathun (?) 1 flagon. 10 From Haggai (son of) Diaphoros, two flagons.
11 Tabo daughter of Haniah, the house. Ardabs 3 . . . 12, 13
14 The bonds in the hand of Jonathan and me : 15 Simeon b. Haggai
came up to . . . 16 . . . SMTI, 1 bond for 40 she-asses. 1V . . . Simeon,
i bond for 12 kerashin 18 8 shekels. 19 . . . Simeon, 1 bond for 400
zuzin.
20 . . . Simeon, 1 bond for 4 hallurin . . . 21 and 1 2 months . . . 22 Obadiah
(son of) Zaccur, 1 bond for 120 zuzin. 23 . . . Obadiah (son of) Zaccur,
1 bond for 10 ardabs of wheat. 24 Shabbethai (daughter of) Haggai
will give 1 bond on her house. 25 . . . Shabbethai (daughter of) Haggai,
1 bond for 24 ardabs of wheat. 26 In her hand is 1 bond of Johanan
b. Dallui . . . 27 for 100 zuzin.
28 In the hand of /imathan, the wheat of(?) Yahya b. . . beniah. 23 In
the hand of Jonathan ... 6 of asses. 30 A phylactery (?) of silver, 10;
2 trays of silver. 31 In the hand of Nathan, the ... of Meshullam b.
'Azgad for 2 shekels. 32 My ... in his hand; our large ... in his-hand.
33 The large one in his hand, and the small (?) one in his hand ; a
beautiful ... 34 in his hand. The ... of Yedoniah . . . 35 in his hand.
30 wheat 2 ardabs 1 quarter. 37 In his hand the . . . of bronze.
NKRS, daughter of Haniah ... 38 In his hand our 39 The
wine which they gave shall be kept back (?) this year. SL . . . the priest
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 81 197
40 in TMASU 21 ... 2 flagons ... 41 Dallui junior, a garden for 46,
1 hallur (?)... 42 . . . Abithi 3 flagons. 43 Obadiah ... 6 flagons,
1 hallur (?) 44 Profit (?) 100 zuzin.
45 which he brought down to Thebes (?)... 46 47 To H . . he
lent 2 plates . . . 48 he lent 6 plates . . . 49-51
52-55 m
56 Hargalti for . . . shekels ... 57 64, 1 quarter ... 58, 59
G0 the forty in . . . 6* K 10, 1 ka at 1 shekel 2 quarters, remainder
1 shekel. °2 Nikias 6 bottles at 3 quarters, remainder \ k. G3 . . .
Nikias 6 bottles at 3 quarters, remainder 1. 64 Apollonius will pay \ ka
at 2 shekels 1 quarter. G5 Yania 4 bottles at 2 quarters. G6 Yania
. . . bottles . . .
07 at 1 quarter. G8 . . . 6 bottles at 3 quarters. G9 Self 2
bottles. 70 Nathan. We will lend 1 bottle at •§. 71 Yania, 3 bottles at
\\ quarters. 72 . . . Nikias, 6 bottles at 3 quarters. 73 Yania, . . .
bottle . . .
74 NBS, 6 bottles at 3 quarters. 75 Yania, 4 bottles at 2 quarters.
7G . . . Nikias, 6 bottles at 3 quarters. 77 Remainder, 2 quarters.
78 Judah, 2 bottles at 1 quarter. 79 . . . Nikias, 1 bottle, -|. 80 Yania,
2 bottles at 1 quarter. 81 Yania, -| ka at . . .
82 1 quarter. 83 Per flagon five ... 84 Isidoros, 2 bottles at
1 quarter. 85 Poros, 1 ka at 1 shekel 2 quarters. 8G Hargalti, a half at
3 quarters. 87 Lysimakhos, 7 bottles at 3^ quarters. 88 Kostos, 6 bottles
at 3 quarters. 89 Diaphoros, 4 bottles at 2 quarters. 90 Abithi (son of)
Nathin, 6 bottles at 3 quarters.
91 Abithi ...... 92 Isidoros, 4 bottles at 2 quarters. 93 Yania, 6 bottles
at 3 quarters. 94 Bakkhias, 9 bottles at 1 shekel \ (a quarter). !l5 Yonia,
2 bottles at 1 quarter. 9G Judah, 5 bottles at 2-| quarters. °7 Yania,
3 bottles at 1^ quarters. 98 Rehabel, 1 bottle at \ (a quarter). " Obadiah
(son of) Yashub . . .
100 4 bottles at 2 quarters. 101 Yanm, 4 bottles at 2 quarters.
102 PTPI, 4 bottles at 2 quarters. 103 PTU, 6 bottles at 3 quarters.
104 Yonia, 4 bottles at 2 quarters. 105 ZPRH, 2 bottles at 1 quarter.
106 jror (p) PTU, 2 ka at 3 shekels, remainder 6 M. 107 Armais, 3 bottles
at \\ quarters. 108
109 In the house of Yashib . . . 5 . . . 110. In our house . . . 2 . . . 2 . . .
open. U1 Bronze-bands which they put on the date-palms of Pehi.
112 This year for tax 7 kerashin 3 shekels. 113 . . . PTU, 8 bottles at
1 shekel. 114 . . . PTU, 2 bottles at 2 (?) quarters. 8 bottles at 1 shekel.
115 Abithi to our house (?)•.. 'RBI A, 3 bottles at // quarters.
11G 117 . . . . 4 bottles at 2 quarters.
118 .. . remainder 119 For mine, Nikias value of wine 12° 3
shekels. 121 . . . Nikias ... 122 30th of Thoth. 123 124 24 zuzin
1 quarter.
i98 ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 81
im lae Sostratos, 3 bottles at \\ quarters. 127 Self, 12 bottles.
Shabbethai (son of) Haniah, 3 bottles at 2 quarters. 128 . . . Self,
4 bottles. 129 . . . Self* 6 bottles 130 at 1 shekel . . . Self, 6 bottles
131 at 2 quarters. Nikias 1 ka 1 shekel, at 2 quarters, remainder
2 quarters 132 at 2 quarters. Judah, 1 2 bottles at j shekels 2 quarters
remainder 3 quarters 133 at 2 quarters . . . Self, 4 bottles.
184 ... 2 for wheat 1 seah. 135 13G . . . 3 for wheat 1 seah.
l:;:, 138
• •••••
Line 1. N^jy is more probable than xpjy (PSBA) 'Fruits' meaning
' produce ' in general. VQK for \T3K elsewhere, a feminine name.
Line 2. pvnbw a feminine? name. Cf. n¥D^ Salome, in Midrash
and Talmud, said to be for ]V)i cbw. She may be the mother (or father)
of Abihi, m3 being omitted as 13 is elsewhere in this document.
NTQ¥J ' plantation ' i. e. field or farm. D for mo.
Line 3. 11 very doubtful. It does not correspond to any other entry.
3 \ 'one half should have » as elsewhere.
Line 4. pEHK as 1. 5. Sayce suggests Arsinoe.
Line 5. 32 Sayce 'on account of, perhaps for 1V33. It generally
occurs where a name is repeated.
Line 7. p[">3] "arSe bottles. Probably of wine.
Line 9. 3W a name. The [n]l3 is omitted. After }n3 the \ is
unintelligible, and perhaps is not to be so read. It may be }in3.
Line 10. D12H Diaphoros. "13 omitted. p3"tt perhaps a dual
form (Sayce), or a mere caprice as |3"I2 is used before with \\.
Line 11. &JT3 reading and meaning uncertain. The rest of the
line is also unintelligible.
Line 12. n~i3 . D a name?
Line 15. NJSN^ Sayce, 'to our side' (Wteb) i.e. joined our partner-
ship (?).
Line 1 6. jiODn , ' she-asses ' with N to distinguish it from the masculine ?
The "3 no doubt means ' concerning '.
Line 19. *» is probably the same as the sign for 100, often used in
the Behistun text. Perhaps originally for [flfcTjO.
Line 20. N^*l» in later Aramaic should mean 'property', which does
not seem suitable here or in 1. 21.
Line 22. }m must be very small coins since the number is so large —
hardly a quarter of a shekel.
Line 24. jnn if right is for }n3D.
Line 29. nD"3"i (or f2i). Possibly a name. In any case the numeral
after it is difficult to explain.
Line 30. n|?an . Can it be used in the ordinary sense, a ' phylactery '
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 81 199
in a silver case? The numeral is again difficult, unless it means the
value, 10 shekels (?), and similarly in 1. 29.
Line 31. N3V1 a quite unknown word. Sayce suggests that it is
Persian, but there seem to be no traces of Persian in this document.
Line 33. N?in ' cheap ' (Sayce), but the reading is very doubtful.
Line 34. Nr" or N't?, probably the end of a noun. ? Nfcjnn as in
H. 37, 38.
Line 37. Ktyin some unknown article made of bronze. ,D13f.
The final letter might be another D. Greek or Egyptian ?
Line 39. ^n" is probable. ' Shall be held in suspense' i.e. not used,
or not reckoned in the account ?
Line 40. 1DNDB3. The last letter seems to belong to this name (?).
Line 41. ^?1. Name? as elsewhere. Sayce suggests 'bucket', but
the form (for ^*i) is difficult.
Line 42. npTEQ cf. tSin 11. 20, 21. It may be related to ^bl.
Line 43. Dna is used of 'stirring' wine, i. e. causing it to ferment?
Line 44. ''JnD perhaps 'profit' from *3n.
Line 45. n5o?. Sayce ' to Thebes '.
Line 47. i"Q"i ' lent at interest '.
Line 56. T^nn as in 1. 86, where it should be a name.
Line 62. S \ 5 is fairly certain, not S \ O.
Line 65. NT probably like the common form »NJ>, for pnv. In 11. 95,
104 KW. It can hardly be ' the Greek '.
Line 74. D33 perhaps badly written for D33 = D'OJ.
Line 78. min\ The name does not occur in the Elephantine texts.
Line 83. After riB>»n something is wanted. There is not room for
more than one letter, or two.
Line 86. 373 i. e. half a ka, as the price shows.
Line 98. 73m perhaps for 7N2m, cf. rram 1 Chron. 2317 &c. Names
in -el are not found in the Elephantine texts.
Lines 102. isns 103. TnD apparently names.
Line 109. yr\]lb (and in 1. no). A connexion with V^yb seems
unsuitable.
Line no. |CK"Q apparently to be so read, but the N is strange.
A plural is required.
Line 114 is erased, being no doubt an erroneous repetition of 1. 113.
Line 115. N3ri37 for 60JV3? ? N^3"|J? or rny, apparently a name.
Line 126. 5mDD. Sayce suggests perhaps Sostratos.
Line 130. \Ba. If this refers to 1. 129 the proportion is unusual.
It should be /H~\2, and so in 1. 131.
200
No. 82.
Fragments of a legal document, bought by Prof. Sayce in Egypt and
given by him to the Bodleian Library (MS. Aram. e. 2 (P)). It was
published in PSBA, 19 15, p. 217, with a facsimile.
The writing is similar to that of no. 81, and the date is therefore
probably about the same, early in the 3rd century b. c. As it is an
official document it would not have been written in Aramaic, one would
suppose, much after 300 b. c.
Unfortunately it is too fragmentary to admit of a continuous translation.
Probably nothing is missing before 1. 1, or only part of a line which may
have contained the address, e. g. ' to our lord X '. The beginnings and
ends of all the lines are lost, and several words are illegible, so that the
details are quite obscure. As far as it can be made out, the general
sense seems to be that three litigants were concerned with the division of
certain property, including a house. One of them was perhaps executor
and had handed over part of the estate to the ' heads of the congregation ',
who were now to distribute it. If the reading "]H3y is right in 1. 1, the
document is a report of proceedings by the judges to some higher official.
The ' judges ' are probably officers of state, but the ' heads of the congre-
gation' must be Jewish elders who were recognized, by them. The place
of the action may have been Abydos or H3D (Thebes?), where there must
have been a Jewish settlement at this date. The name Abydos occurs
in 3s3.
, . . [onjsa n span inayi
. . . [i]nnay "12 njw ['•ajn in rfr\ »i!>[n na]
. . . nn nns* m~m nnua »wt rvn .
. . . mnN jroN » . . 5 pib> n . . ,
, . . [smjny vtmrbs r\zbw
. . . [}]mjjW>jj rwwn <T2 mprv . ,
. , . n jjq /// fp^n ^ap^ spnnso tt ,
, , . b \am s6» "2 mfi s^i ins . ,
, . , [pi»]n jurM . . . in ... 9b \rh nn . .
. . . b nnns* nobsi? mm »i /// jp[^n]
. . . ^v nnsp fna "r jnn unfa ,
. , , \bn i^ pnaM
♦ . . [au]s6 strop ... 13
. . . vby on . , . 14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 82 201
1 and your servants the judges who are in Abydos . . . 2 son of
BaUui, Delaiah b. Haggai, Shib'a b. Obadiah ... 3 ... the house of
Zomi in the city of Thebes, H . . . came ... 4 of the street (?)
... I will give. Afterwards . . .
5 I paid to the heads of the congregation ... G . . . let him come
before him ; and they gave evidence as to all goods ... 7 . . . and other
things in 3 parts. Now . . . 8 and it was not a complete
house (?), and they shall give to ... 9 but to A . . . son of . . .
and they shall give a par/ ... 10 . . . 3 parts of a Tora to Plta his sister
to . . . u two which he shall bring . . .
12 . . . Abbahun, correct division . . .
13 . . . before us to Abydos ... 14
Line 1. The remains of letters at the beginning have not been
deciphered. At the end a place-name is wanted, as in 1. 13, and [ui3]s
seems the most likely, but it is only a conjecture.
Line 2. "•vfl] as on an ostrakon, Sachau pi. 68, 21'3,5, which may be
of about the same date. njOB' cf. O.T. jntP. The fl is more like D.
These were no doubt the three persons interested. Cf. 1. 7.
Line 3. V2l7 uncertain. Cf. KDir in Mishna. n3D3 must be the
name of a town. Sayce suggests Thebes as in 8145. , , vn or . , "on
must be part of a name, but its relation to the transaction is not clear.
Line 4. pity very doubtful. There are traces of another line
between 11. 4 and 5.
Line 5. [xnjnj;. The 1 is doubtful, and therefore the restoration is
uncertain, but it is probable. The word occurs in 1522, and is correct
for the Jewish community.
Line 6. n"Q for rfl(?) is unusual. 'Before him'? [|]co:W>y
followed by NnnNI 1. 7, cf. 2012. But the reading here is uncertain.
Line 7. ?2pb '(divided it) according to' i.e. into 'three parts' for the
three litigants.
Line 8. mn very uncertain. What 'a full house' means I cannot
guess. pjJVI is clear, for pjn^l at Elephantine.
Line 10, min is certain, and the three parts ( + 2 in 1. 11) suggest nt^En
miri ''ti'Ein. The word does not occur in the Elephantine papyri, where
there is no allusion to the Law. Or is it Tin 'her ox'? It was evidently
a valuable possession. How HD^D was concerned with it is not clear.
Line 11. v pTfi or Dinnn ? nnN"1 jnn ' come with' i. e. bring them.
Line 12 probably the last line, ratifying the apportionment. pnm
a name. Cf. irDN, })2N.
Lines 13, 14. It is quite uncertain where this fragment belongs.
203
No. S3.
A fragment with writing on both sides, in the Harrow School Museum.
It is not dated. The recto, containing a column of accounts, is in a fairly
early hand, probably before 400 b.c. The verso, containing a list of
names and a few lines of accounts, is more roughly written and probably
nearly as late as 300 b. c. That the papyrus should have been used
again after such an interval is strange, but not impossible, especially as
the verso shows signs of being palimpsest.
The verso is very much faded in parts, and on both sides the reading
is uncertain owing to the lack of context and the few opportunities of
comparison.
Reverse.
»nyr6 \///3
1
'B3D NnV NDE
2
♦JDNBB p // \// 3
3
/////[^]k f^>n
4
/////-3N 1// ///a
5
[/]//// -3 k \//////n
6
[/////] -N //////// [2]
7
[/////] 3 K 1// ////// 2
8
/////■3N ^n
9
/////T3N \->2
10
/////-X |/^2
11
|/ \//^X \//~>2
12
/////-3N \///~>2
13
/////■?* //|//-^[n]
14
/////^K \//\//~>2
15
//[///^N \///] ///->}
16
/////[IK] || //////->!
i7
/////•^N [//]/ |//|//[->2]
18
//////// jpiD
19
/// p . . .
20
Niins »i>so
21
\t<nv
22
\ nriJDD
23
ARAMAIC PAPYRI No. 83 203
\ IDS 24
\ NIT* 25
\ DCS" 26
\ ifi 27
»BS , HpDJ 28
|// pD3 Nrvvo 7y 29
. . \ !?5 Kris D^y 30
1 On the 4th of Tybi 2 Zeho came to Memphis. 3 On the 5th from
Petisis 4 on our account 25 ardabs. 5 On the 6th 25 ardabs. G On the
7th 25 ardabs. 7 6>« the 8th 2/ ardabs. 8 On the 9th 2/ ardabs.
9 On the 10th 25 ardabs. 10 On the nth 25 ardabs. n On the 12th
25 ardabs. 12 On the 13th 25 ardabs. 13 On the 14th 25 ardabs.
u On the 15th 25 ardabs. 15 On the 16th 25 ardabs. 1G On the 17th
2/ ardabs. n On the 18th 25 ardabs. 18 (9« //fo /9th 25 ardabs.
Reverse.
19 ... 8. 20 . . . 3.
21 Money-lenders : 22 Zeho 1 23 Petnether 1 24 Pasu 1 25 Zeho 1 26 YSM 1
27 Pi j
28 Expenditure ... 29 For the inheritance (?) 3 talents. 30 The servant
of Zeho, each . . .
• • '
Line 2. ~d5d very faint, but probable if NDD does not require 7. Cf.
427 "BSE nn if that really means ' go down to M.'
Line 4. f£7n probably. p7n would not make sense. Cf. 5pn in 44s.
N no doubt for pmfce.
Lines 5-18 simply enumerate the days from the 6th to the 19th, on
each of which 25 ardabs were received or given out.
Line 19. JpTD. I cannot guess what word this is.
Line 21. At the side are three strokes belonging to a previous
column. K'WIB the ' table ' of a money-changer ?
Lines 22-27. The names are all Egyptian. For the \ after each
cf. 331-*.
Line 26. DCS" quite uncertain.
Line 28. '•ox . not '•DXy, and there is no obvious word.
Line 29. NJVTO apparently so to be read. 'Inheritance'? }"I33 at
Elephantine pa:3.
ao4
The Story of Ahikar.
Eleven sheets of papyrus, all more or less fragmentary, three of them
with double columns.
They contain an Aramaic version of the well-known story of Ahikar,
followed by a collection of proverbs, similar to, but not the same as,
those found in later versions. Lines 1-78, the narrative, are practically
continuous, but the story is not finished. As to the remainder, the
proverbs being disconnected, or only occasionally related in subject, it is
impossible to say whether the sheets of papyrus are continuous.
There is no date, but from the appearance of the writing we may
safely conclude that it belongs, like the majority of these documents, to
the latter part of the fifth century b. c.
The story, and this version of it in particular, is interesting for the
following reasons among others :
(1) The hero is mentioned by name in the book of Tobit.
(2) There seem to be references to the story in various books of the
Old and New Testaments.
(3) Hitherto it has been known only in later (post-Christian) forms.
(4) The papyrus shows that the original work goes back at least as far
as the fifth century b.c. and probably earlier.
(5) It is thus the earliest specimen of wisdom-literature outside the
Old Testament and cuneiform texts.
The general questions relating to the story and its transmission, may
be studied in English in ' The Story of Ahikar ... by Conybeare, Rendel
Harris and A. S.Lewis', 2nd ed. Cambridge, 1913 (here quoted as
'Story') and in Charles' Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, vol. ii, Oxford,
1913 (here quoted as 'Charles') p. 715 + , by the same editors, together
with the works mentioned there. It is only proposed here to deal with
the Aramaic text found in these papyri and with the questions specially
connected with it.
Owing to the broken state of the papyri their reading and interpreta-
tion alike are often uncertain. A large number of articles dealing with
the text have added something to its elucidation, but much still
remains to be done. For the present purpose the suggestions of the
following scholars, as being the most worthy of attention, have been
carefully considered :
Baneth, OLZ, 1914, 248, 295, 348.
Epstein, ZAiTW, i9i2,p. 128; 1913, pp. 222, 310; OLZ, 1916, 204.
Grimme, OiSZ^j^j.1, 529.
Lidzbarski, Ephemeris III (19 12), p. 253.
THE STORY OF AHIKAR 205
Ed. Meyer, Papyrnsfund, p. 102.
Montgomery, OLZ, 19 12, 535. Expository Times, 24 (19 13), p. 428.
Noldeke, ZDMG, 67, p. 766. 'Untersuch. zum Achiqar-Roman ' in
Abh. der Gb'tt. Ges. 14, 4 (1913).
Perles, OLZ, 191 1, 497; 1912, 54.
Seidel, ZAW, 191 2, p. 292.
Smend, ThLZ, 191 2, 387.
Strack, ZDMG, 191 1, p. 826.
Stummer, OLZ, 19 14, 252 ; 1915, 103. Der kritische Wert . . . Mini-
ster, 1914.
Torczyner, OLZ, 191 2, 397.
Wensinck, OLZ, 191 2, 49.
The Aramaic is not (as assumed in Charles, p. 720) the original of the
book. There are indeed few Hebraisms in it, and although it was found
in a Jewish colony, the story shows no sign of Jewish origin. It is not
derived from Hebrew sources1 and there is no reason why we should
expect it to be so. The Jews were not the only literary people of the
time. The fact that Tobit refers to it as a well-known story, does not
prove that it was known to the author as being a piece of native Jewish
literature. Its fame was much more widely spread. At the time when
these papyri were written, Egypt was, and had been for a century, under
Persian rule, and as we see from other documents, the Persian govern-
ment officially used Aramaic in the provinces. The language was there-
fore well-known at headquarters, qualified translators must have been
employed (as earlier by Assurbanipal), and it is reasonable to suppose
that texts other than purely official documents would gradually be made
known abroad through this medium. It is true we know little enough of
Aramaic in the fifth century B.C., and nothing at all of its literary narrative
style, but one cannot read a few paragraphs of Old Persian (such as
Darius' inscription at Behistun) without being struck by the general
similarity in style of the Aramaic narrative of Ahikar. It is always unsafe
to trust to an abstract estimate of style, but when, as here, inherent
probability points to the same conclusion, the argument deserves con-
sideration. Moreover there are a few definite signs that the Aramaic is
under Persian influence. The name of Assyria is written Tins (as later
in the Targums), not "IttPM as in the Sinjirli inscriptions. This is not
because the papyrus is 300 years later than the Sinjirli texts but because
it follows the Persian form Athura 2. A peculiarity of the Ahikar text is
1 The resemblance of phrases, e.g. in 2 Sam. i611,19-23 and 1818 (j3 V pX) to
expressions used in Ahikar, is due to mere coincidence.
a This was first suggested to me by Prof. Sayce.
206 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
the constant use of ilOC after a person's name, as in line i n»C IpTlX ' a
man named Ahikar '. This is not found in ordinary Aramaic l, but is
a common idiom in Old Persian as Behistun ii, 6 Vidarna nama ' a man
named Vidarna '. The use of *inN again, as an almost redundant con-
junction, is exactly parallel to the OP pasava ' afterwards ' used in the
same way.
The Aramaic then is a translation from Persian or made under Persian
influence, but Persian was probably not the original language of the story.
The Persians were not, at the beginning, a literary people, although they
made great efforts to become so after their conquest of Babylon. It was
part of their enlightened policy. Now Clement of Alexandria {Stromaia i,
15, 69, ed. Stahlin, Lpz., 1906) says that the Greek philosopher Democritus
of Abdera borrowed from Babylonian moral sayings 2 and incorporated
with his own compositions a translation of the a-rijXr] of Akikaros 3,
who no doubt is Ahikar. It is true that Clement goes on to say that
Democritus, who prided himself on his travels, claimed to have visited
Babylon, Persia and Egypt and to have sat at the feet of the magi and
priests (tois re /myois kclI tois iepevcri fxaOrjTevwv), SO that he might have
borrowed from a Persian text or even from the present Aramaic, since
his travels must have taken place 4 when this papyrus was already in
existence. But Clement was evidently following a trustworthy authority
and would not have associated Ahikar with Babylonian writings if he had
meant Persian. The debt of the Greeks to Babylon as well as to Egypt
and even to India in matters of physical science and philosophy is
acknowledged, and need not be emphasized here. Moreover the view
that the story came from a Babylonian source agrees with other indica-
tions. Though it bears a Persian colouring over its Aramaic dress, its
body is clearly Babylonian. The kings Senacherib and Esarhaddon are
in the right order (not reversed, as in the later versions) and their names
are more correct in form than in the OT, the names Nadin and Nabusu-
miskun are purely Babylonian, so is the use of DTvK (pi. = ildni) and
CDC as a god (neither of them Persian), while the frequent mention of
1 Though it occurs in other documents of this collection, where it is also due to
Persian influence.
2 ArjfioKpiTos yap tovs BafivKcvviovs \6yovs r/Otnovs [ai/roC?] ■jreirolrjTar \eytrai yap
ttjv 'Pi.Kuca.pov arijXrjv tpfxrjviv9tioav tois ISiois ovvragai ovyypapfiaai. The first sentence,
which is not very clear, is quoted by Eusebius in Praep. Evang. x, 4. Diogenes
Laertius v, 50 mentions a work Tltpl tSjv kv BafivXaivt Upwv ypap/xarcuv, edited by
Theophrastus. Cf. also Strabo xvi, p. 762, wapa Se tois BoonopijvoTs ' Axaiicapov.
3 See Story, p. xli + for a discussion of the statement and reasons for accepting it.
4 He lived from 466^0 361 B.C.
THE STORY OF AHIKAR 207
Assyria would be quite unsuitable in a Persian composition. There
would have been no need to put the story back into Assyrian times,
since the incidents related might just as well have occurred under a
Persian despot. We know that the Babylonians did possess Xoyous
rjOiKovs, gnomic or ' wisdom '-literature, in the form of proverbs,1 some of
which are similar in character to the proverbs of Ahikar, and like them
are collected under the name of a particular person. It appears then
much more reasonable to suppose that the Ahikar story and proverbs
were originally composed in Babylonian, than to assume that the original
was Persian, since we have no knowledge of the existence of any such
literature among the Persians in or about 500 b.c. The composition
must go at least as far back as that and may be even older.2
With regard to the word crrr/A.17, used by Clement, there has been some
unnecessary discussion. Of course no one writes a long series of
proverbs on a pillar, or at least it would be very unusual to do so. They
would be written (in Babylonia) on a tablet or tablets of clay, which
might be of any size up to, say, 10 inches long. It is unlikely that
Clement had ever seen a cuneiform tablet, and if his authority implied
that the proverbs of Akikaros were inscribed on some hard substance, he
might reasonably take it for granted that they were inscribed in the only
way he knew, namely like a Greek inscription on a column. Therefore
(TTrjXr} need only represent 'tablet', and does not imply any special dis-
tinction. The very strangeness of the word corroborates the story.
The Aramaic papyrus must be dated some time before 400 b. c, say
about 430. The supposed Babylonian original cannot be earlier than
668, in the form from which the Aramaic is translated, although the
story may be based on an earlier fact or legend. We have no definite
proof, but some indications, of a more precise date. It is natural to
suggest the time of Assurbanipal 3 (successor of Esarhaddon), the great
patron of learning, at whose direction countless texts of all kinds were
re-copied, and new works composed. Probable as this date is, however,
there are reasons against it. In reading the Aramaic text attentively (and
assuming that it represents the Babylonian original faithfully) one cannot
help feeling that the historical setting is vague.4 Esarhaddon is not
1 See Langdon in PSBA 1916, p. 105+ and the references there. Also in AJSL
1912, p. 217.
2 Bnt not earlier than 668 (Esarhaddon's death) if that king's name belonged to the
original story.
3 Cf. his complaint of the ingratitude of his brother, in Rogers, History of Babylonia
ii, p. 447, which might have suggested the Ahikar story.
4 So Ed. Meyer, Papyrusfund, p. 120 + .
208 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
a living portrait : he has become a conventional figure. More definite is
the fact that nowhere is either Nineveh or Babylon named — at least in the
fragments preserved. The king nearly always has the title ' king of
Assyria ', and we cannot suppose that his capital would not sometimes be
mentioned if its greatness was still a memory.1 Nineveh was destroyed, and
with it ' the kingdom of Assyria, all of it ' just before 600 b. c. How long
would it take to obscure the features of history and to make Assyria
a suitable setting for an old-world story? Suppose we allow 50 years
from the fall of Nineveh,2 and allow something over a century for the
story to become popular and to be translated from Babylonian into
(Persian ? and thence into) Aramaic. We are then brought to about the
same date as Sachau for the original composition, about 550 (Sachau says
550-450), only that we hold it to have been first written in Babylonian.
Whether it was translated first into Persian and thence into Aramaic, or
directly from Babylonian into Aramaic, cannot be decided and is of no
great importance. The Aramaic translation was made not later (perhaps
earlier) than 450, by a scholar who, if he did not make it from Persian, was
familiar with the Persian language and accustomed to translating from
Persian, and whose Aramaic was strongly influenced by Persian. The
existing papyrus is not his first draft, as is shown by the blanks in it.
The copyist worked on a text which was already old and injured. He
experienced the same difficulties as we have ; sometimes he could not
read his text and sometimes he did not understand it.
It must have been this or a similar Aramaic version which the author
of Tobit knew, for there is nowhere any sign of the existence of an early
Hebrew translation.3 Nor is there any reason why there should have
been one. Aramaic was perfectly well understood by the Jews in the
last centuries b.c., was in fact more a vernacular than Hebrew. If an
Aramaic version of it already existed, as we see it certainly did, there
would be no need to translate a piece of purely popular literature into
Hebrew.
Before the recovery of this Aramaic text, the story was known in
1 Cf. e.g. the frequent mention of Babylon in the book of Daniel.
2 Events moved rapidly at that time. In 550 the greatness of Egypt under Necho
and Hophra was recent enough to account for its appearance in the story, if it was
original — see below. In Tobit 1415 (Sinaitic text) Ahikar is associated with the fal
of Nineveh, so that this may have been mentioned in the original form of the story.
3 Whether or not the book of Tobit was originally written in Hebrew does not con-
cern us here. At any rate the version published by Neubauer ( The Book of Tobit,
Oxford, 1878) is merely a mediaeval Jewish production. The name of Ahikar is
there spelt "^pX.
THE STORY OF AHIKAR 209
several later versions and appears in the Arabian Nights and even in
India. As long ago as 1880 it was pointed out by Hoffmann x that the
name of the hero is mentioned in the book of Tobit (i22, 1410, &c).
There are two possible ways of accounting for this fact : either the story
already existed before the book of Tobit and was well known, or it was
compiled in order to justify the reference in Tobit, just as the histories of
the more obscure apostles were composed in the early church. The
former, which in any case would seem the more probable, is now shown
to be true, since the papyrus is two or three centuries earlier than Tobit.2
A comparison between this early text and the later versions is rendered
more difficult by the broken state of the papyri. The book, if it may be
called so, is divided into two main parts, the narrative proper and the
proverbs. Whether the two parts were originally distinct and whether
the narrative was only used as a setting for the proverbs, we need not
now inquire. In the later versions these two parts are subdivided into
four : (1) the introduction, down to the adoption of Nadin ; (2) the maxims
by which he was educated; (3) the rest of the narrative, including
Nadin's treachery, the restoration of Ahikar and the episode in Egypt ;
(4) the maxims by which Nadin was punished. Our Aramaic text is,
as would be expected, much simpler in the narrative part than the
later versions. We have the beginning, and the first 4 fragments
( = 5 columns) are continuous, bringing the story down to the point at
which Nabusumiskun reports to the king that he has killed Ahikar.
There seems therefore to be no place for the educative series of
proverbs, which should begin at 1. 9, in the middle of a continuous piece.
The rest of the narrative is lost, so that we cannot tell whether it con-
tained the Egyptian episode or not. So far as it goes, the narrative is on
the same lines as in the later versions. If it continued on those lines,
something is wanted to account for the rehabilitation of Ahikar, and this
may have been supplied by the Egyptian episode, though perhaps in a
much less elaborate form.3 On the other hand the ending may have
been more abrupt and arbitrary, especially if the story was only intended
as a prop for the proverbs. It must have ended happily, otherwise there
would be no point in the scheme by which Ahikar's life was saved. In
i l In Ausziige aus syrischen Erzdhlungen . . . in Abhandlungen fiir d. Kunde d.
Worgenlands, vol. 8.
2 Which is supposed to have been written c. 230 B. c. See Simpson in Charles,
Apocrypha.
3 The incidents in this episode strike me as being too modern in character for a
Babylonian story. At any rate I do not recall anything quite like them in cuneiform
literature.
2599 P
210 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
any case the whole of the narrative must have come first. Then follow
the proverbs. They must have belonged to the story, because some of
them clearly refer to Nadin's conduct, but they differ so much from the
series in the later versions, that we have little help in determining their
order where the papyrus is not continuous. Pap. 55 (line 79) does
indeed start with a few lines corresponding roughly to a group early in
the Syriac second series. Otherwise there is only occasional agreement
with any of the later versions. The original collection formed a nucleus
which was increased, diminished or varied according to the taste of
subsequent editors. Collections of proverbs, including fables, were a
favourite form of literature among the Semitic (and other) peoples.
They were often compiled as representing the teaching of some particular
wise man, and were put forth under his name. Thus the Babylonian
collection mentioned above is ascribed to a person whose name is broken,
we have the Hebrew collection of Ben Sira, and in the OT the book
attributed to Solomon (Prov. i1, io1) with which are incorporated
(perhaps the sayings of the wise 24s3) the proverbs of Solomon which
Hezekiah's scribes copied out, 251 (ipTiyn 'translated' or 'trans-
literated'?), the words of Agur 30*, and the words of king Lemuel 311.
(The last for instance would form an exact parallel to the Ahikar text if
some one had prefixed to them an edifying story to explain why his
mother taught him). Many of these sayings must have been constantly
quoted conversationally, and have become part of the current wisdom of
the world. But from their very popularity they tend to be modified —
improved or distorted, simplified or obscured — and would soon lose all
memory of their original ownership. Then arises another wise man, qui
prend son Men oil il le trouve, and with his own work incorporates, con-
sciously or unconsciously, popular sayings (and often more than one form
of the same maxim) without any intention of plagiarizing. Or he takes
some well-known book of maxims and improves it. In this way has
' wisdom '-literature grown, and thus we may account for the differences
between the proverbs of the Aramaic Ahikar and those of the later
versions, as well as for the elements which it has in common with Ben
Sira, the book of Proverbs, or with similar works. In fact there is no
reason why, if Ahikar had been current in his circle, the compiler of the
book of Proverbs should not have included parts of it in his work, just as
he included the 'words of Agur', which are no more Jewish in spirit
than Ahikar. They are just worldly wisdom. Later Hebrew works,
such as the Derekh Erez zu/a, generally have a definitely Jewish (but not
necessarily religious) colouring. In the following notes no attempt is
THE STORY OF AHIKAR 211
made to trace the proverbs in other literature. That would involve a
much more extensive commentary. My object has been to contribute
something to the establishment of the text and its meaning, without which
the larger questions cannot be satisfactorily discussed.
The use of the sign -j^ to mark the end of a proverb is not found
in the narrative part, nor in any other of these papyri. It may be an
archaic N, for "inx (?), but cf. the sign ^» used in the ' Logia' to mark off
sayings, Grenfell and Hunt, Oxyrh. Pap. iv, pi. 1. This may be held
to indicate that the proverbs formed a distinct document, but probably
the sign was only used in such disconnected compositions.
In trying to restore the text certain points must be taken into account.
The papyrus was written in columns which were not all of the same
width. The text of the narrative was written continuously, with division
of words but without leaving blank spaces. If the original width of the
column can be ascertained, we can estimate approximately the number
of letters missing in a lacuna. The width of the column, however, is not
maintained with the same mathematical precision as e. g. in a well-
written Greek or Hebrew biblical MS. Thus the width of the first
column seems to be shown by line 10, where the completion at the end
may be taken as certain, cf. 3012. But if it is right, the line must have
been shorter by 3 or 4 letters than e. g. 1. 13 where the restoration at the
end is equally certain. Within such limits, however, the width of the
column is a useful guide. The style is so simple and the repetition of
set phrases is so frequent that in many cases a lacuna can be filled with
great probability, while in some the context compels a particular
restoration.
None of these helps are found in the proverbs, where restoration is
consequently very difficult. There we often have half a line, or less, left
blank, so that the width of the column is no sure guide. These blanks
occur also in the version of the Behistun inscription and no doubt
represent passages which the scribe could not read in his exemplar and
so simply left them out. There are no recurrent phrases, and in
literature of this kind there is no telling what the author will say next.
It is the unexpected which makes the proverb. The later versions
seldom help. There is therefore much room for subjective reconstruc-
tion, with little result that can be called satisfactory.
p 2
■H2 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR
Col. i. Sachau, plate 40.
. . .] rnai can n tjtoi can idd n»p np^nx ^[o r&« 1
mnx ey]n npmx n[an] m[i]i>» nmp ^ mm c6 xna ion [na 2
mn nba
moy byi ^ x]i> pa d^ n[ax noxi n]mx "jta ananas *f nnpry m[avi 3
Dpi mnx i$>]o a*mn[3B> nna nn]x mnx -jbta annnov mn ^01 4
mac px]a wa[M annrav *ijn mnxa -j^o mm ma pxnnox 5
mm jdi] nm[» b ♦Jinx nai> [hot »]b [pi nax] ae> 6
amerced rwn nax na xa^o pxn-fjcx^ n[npry mavi tbd]^ 7
nmam Tins n] ma [not? pa nnp^> np^nx n]:x nnx mnx [•]!>» 8
laa xata Dip »]oy vbyn a[aa nncpjn^ rw]n xnatai nnoarn 9
xn&ynajo noam mnx -£» pwnDM Dip nnanp ottod 10
11m ipmxb [N^a]^ pn idki mnx t^o pxnnDx nom "ins nW »[t u
nn[nx na nb] na xh nna^ ta»pn n nba mnx oy Ktyan xns[D 12
px]nnDx Dip npTrs d^ [n]naDi nana m[nx ita ncx p na 13
mm [•£»
may pa mnx -jta pxnnDx "-sax m[r]n na "ipm[x nax pnrix jovh 14
TOTp n]in i^d »[r] mas vsbn anx[nat^ nn^a n]ax x[a^>n onp mow 15
xn nyai] 16
Col. ii. Sachau, plate 41.
mmay i? nayo^i] xb\n aaa ni>s»^ i>nas xb nax as> 17
mi nba mm tay>i] -iqd ^ qbm im xan na nop pa x[n 18
pxnnDx nay nn»an mta]yi mean »|n t^ mm npry n[»av 19
m]m
^ npry mavi tayn n&D -pa] d^> «ma *? ncxi mnx i[ta 20
nyr:^ na np^nx nax nnx ^] nay^ in -jnmay rsbn [mm 21
nar nai waa n*vi n^i] m*a^ »b n^rx sa»n[1 xn^» 22
laa mn« i^» pxn-iDx onp] *6am aaa np*pm n[»an n 23
nnx ni? may ni»api> ^y n]ya* xnaa in nn»x ^nnAD 24
naa^a nox pj« xn^xa »J>y ncyy rcan nax n m[nx ia 25
mn npry nsav <r xa^ m npmx -id]x f>ax [i]^[d n^xa] d^ 26
-jbdi tay^ ^a m^y xno ^an in] max xa^o a[n]xna^ 27
pxniDx nnx nb mnx mn \m]tai nnoy bin in D^an 28
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 213
nns np^nx btsipf) ni> nox hjm n ntaa] yot? jf>o w*v x^ts> 29
xr xnsna ^y] xn3 na xb n «na na 30
S3«
Col. iii. Sachau, plate 42.
-iexi "WW t^o pxn-i[Dx xon x^onn pxa 32
*ax nrb n s3x w jo i[n pdddgj ^ »ntr 33
rDcnn n3x n nnx njan [nprw xa?e -ion bat* 34
o^n -idd xacr it [*)]p*[n«] bin pn&Bpm 35
na ins pS>y xno ^arv in nob n[mx ba am 36
Tx nrno^ Pinx 1/ p33 noy \jo nm[x t,^o ion p 37
b]^P nn nm[o]a am wy\ ? pDom[aa inx nayn* 38
cb nn^n pins |o[i]^> nnx noy [-j^x xnasi 39
xnna pa T^no n:xi [^r]n noy *r pnn[x p33 cy in 40
^n ruina yn xn[anp it] x-on pDODi[a3 yrn nai 41
na: n xnao xnoy i>yai NO*an xisd [m nsx -10x1 42
■jjjT xi>a "win nin »mb»i nnoy i>[yi nm pnv 43
xmm -j^an in ttbyn ynna no^pn *r n[»an n xna 44
pDjoDia^ nnoxi n^y npnx d^ n^m xna[np in xt^xa 45
»at ^op p pn? jonp »» np^nx in tun [sj« -p xnn 46
T^y ion xa^o rm pxmDx n 'mat* [anxmp na 47
l!> boo n^in non £n xn*aS> in^a* xn[a-ip n^Dpoi? 48
Col. iv. Sachau, plate 43, col. 1.
pvh pn[x i]ny^> *» ny nn^>op nnox rwo in3Dvm win ny ts»to 49
Tnnx
[xn]B»xai ^nionp *pNBn nnyni xata anxruD mp inanp \&w 50
-p^op x!>i "jn^nn vbv »3»n*i xai?o anxraD nmb> «in 1^ W N^ 51
rox jya
;ov!> [n]y irvzb ^2 ^bopn ^>x ^ nay^isx pt'^ msy nas ni>3pi> 52
pins
njN [nn]N nyT Tioyi ^13T^ pnN i»y yn^oa m jonn sa^o p«nnDN 53
d? bmr\ hx *b noxi K*an pdodi33 [my] nnx wrm ^by »3a[npn 54
nms ^ni vdtt 3n«n3D nnoy i>y n nba mnx n ni3N np^nx «[nn 55
214 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
noy *t pin *i^n N-iaa nnuab ion ^21 poooiaa Nnmp [iin n^j 56
nayi [^n] Nnoy d^ ion naNi ^y [V^pppn p|]k cb w[nKi onaN 57
£ io[n D]b [naN n]b now pin t^n [«naa My h]n [n^k> 58
n*3i pD&tnaa
bnb ioni K»3[i pDBDiaa my] Nnaip ^[jrmw nanaNi io]n [nan] n 59
^ wot?
nnoy hn i[n n^o] purriDM *? np[ry n*3*i] ai ip['n«] na? d^> 60
^r ono [in D^y *ar] wfopa ^x nanaN nn n^3 i[inN] ^n 61
nsb jnaN
Pun pa[a yonts" *]rai nar npTiN ^n pin n[ta] wtid [j]i3 baw 62
nb[^] twta
n[ar] Kono n n[iaa pm*] hn nrno^ nar ip^hn n mas pm[N 63
»^? No^y
Col. v. Sachau, plate 43, col. 2.
B>N3i nyT nnoyi ipnx lap Nata] pNniDN pn« ^y ^ny 64
vniaDi Miai^ ioni >i?y aw Nata j]iniidn aa^i \n?y 65
nar Nnoyi ip^N proton ^ pi N^n ia]Doa Dab jnaN naN joaa 66
N>ai pobonA iioni lay anaa pi]n t^n nniaa i»y na^o 67
No^y 1? inani siatapa bit] ntyy naN nbap? my 68
pin t^n sua pa bopn^ m nar] ipnn ^bn ndhd it 69
pNniDN «? nisd ip^N ob unN naijoa yontPN Naiy in 70
t|« uawm nrm^ *afra> t» wai pdd]wu ins ^op Nabo 71
poi nnb , . . . J? ioni mun ny t^N]a non ^ ^odo mn 72
» l]n *nio Dip pbnD* 73
wai it pDooiaa ins "b 3n> jy^str paai nw ^d 74
ni3y p ^ nioN nbapb nb now Najo psniDK ^y ^tn 75
pNniDN nar yDB> vai nn^tapi y iJp^nN^ nro^n nbrx 76
na nin p nosi pDDDna oy »ao n pi]n vwib b$w mho 77
N3^» p]«niDK iy j[*i]k ion 78
Col. vi. Sachau, plate 44.
Nn[A]3 iya ion ;o in pon [n]o 79
. '. '. m]i^13 NniN D^ni iDni s^Nn1 n Ni3 80
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 215
xn^Nn jd sijahonn bnan 16 ib p -iDn jd -pa T^nnn bx 81
rvnn tfb] 1,33b by jpacrK |m men xb »13 "psriDN jn 82
n b»k -f wajba "]H3y bab «|k nan^ [irjaa D^byb nxno 83
. ". . 1 nivab byjn] in [in]a na33 .-idn[i p]*ia nay nap 84
Pnatrrr] aa-ipy -f nmmp db>3 nynn »ni3N nu> 85
vuDyJt^ n jd 3D \m[b]yi rrn[> ny] b[3N]^ xbi cnb 86
. , . ,]ddd ntWP xn^N oi[ ] may [. . , .]b 87
, . .] 1H1 NT1D "inD3 bfrtib HDDD Hl.T N^N 88
..." nns , . , d -f k[swk] n onyja p an batf rrwai new mm 89
fhy vb n Nb[ai]D xw[n] nrua jd ma kb>3? vubaD* «bi ion p3ts> 90
... a] nna3!n nncn[n jd] wnxb [j]an «nen -f vuayty xbDj pyDi 91
B>aa ropwi xnDn [nn]p ^De>b n»»m Knbn ni .tvbp jbo pmn 92
?] n»an
tnon nnts» <n t!>DC [nip] T»p nil ttn -f mw abi nbD yDts»i 93
vupv] abi
u*[. , . . ♦ ,]n»B> . ♦ «^« nm |» [13 . . . . 1] nnax nnnarn 94
. . ,]n tvrbx [annoan] N»»y
Col. vii. Sachau, plate 45.
bya »a -n hd^ j^e^a Nrnabo [nb fD]b[yb i]y »n rrpp jnbtfb ^ 95
n]xK>j jtnp
nb[D ba] ninn ly n-w o[a]n bx [n]a 96
-lonc'N *]Da [jn]b arwixi nn^yy] -ina baa na *]ba by nn«n [v 97
•j^aiD nirp bx ib
nbo ^n nsiv »a 33b npm [nyD]c? n [by J Tpa -id miao ba jd 98
np]b xb 13A nn^Di
3-ik ;d db 3-is my *a mnya i[iriKb] pEian ja nrw ids *nnx »[,]» 99
nnbo
in mm P"i5y i^d ^dd T3"i iDns'b] '•inn nsan t^d nbo naan bx 100
P]dd paD jd
njx pia jd nBxa Tyr oipnbt< [nb]o ^dj[n by] n^p Dyn^D inonp nn 10 1
lb nDnc^x
TDV3 «b[a] nnni in[D]sby 'n^iJn'bN 102
T>y pb' jnnb[N ^may pay »n rnp* ra^K n»pa jn 1?» n[Dip 103
»a] T^a noam
ai6 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
ny im new cy jpy jiddb" n[D^] -f naab "ion3 -jha nb» s|[n 104
■£»] oy B^K p3D
may j» t-i[d] *l wn n^>i pon N[oyD]i «nmo army? *|N noyo 105
mn^N 123!? }33 n»jb>3 -f nrnno «[b] *J NniD3 n3n^ pan "y^>yi 106
nnaniw] onnyrai
noy ta "r }n!> vhonp Dip11 »i in p [i]n n3a nfya qx jama *i^d 107
[K]ma xpns w£ n-nn •ypi oc^a n?nD^> ibo n>BK> 108
Nn3 npsari Tan [n m]i naaba n^>D [n]oa ao jkd 109
Nnx^ idm snon nay •£ w cbv [a]b [anon^ n»b]e£ anp bm Nn« no
Col. viii. Sachau, plate 46.
?xnsT] p -vp* »? tpk k5>i n^D nayDi tSn rvxtw hi
3nin fo W>P n wx n^>i vb\ ps n3D3i pn jvnsm 112
J3D pyn pa pat? pe n^nn ann 113
n[^]yro noa nnao »a tod N^yf> poiDD vnfe na-n Tyr k*n 114
iDNDb naan3 3D pe'K* in jn^K D»m jni jn^N 115
ck yT xb NB>ax p «n ex yr n^ Dnnnop [n n*db> *]aai[a] f^ap i i 6
nib Nap? pxip"1 p ^y kd»3 ti^n t&] rmx 117
nay] *at5>D "3JD3X1 "m xuyb new tnea nay nny vn Ntayb yaa *nea i i 8
!>[n^] ab *a *» jnp^n ^k *iba "a'Da »S> nob {OD3^> nnoxi xray 119
. . . n [«n]DK by bin Nan -f non piwb pb tfata d^b> 120
T"id]n n:nax p» NB»[a]n "f •£ kk> ni? now [sJncN lay pne>N 121
, . . p]b [pi>K n]yb jo onnmnaoi nnbn n[b>3]d k[k>]3« «to n!?^3 122
3D nb>3]n Da jd nata npsa jn -f nnmnao^i] lbn N[ca]D "pra ^ *a 123
kb»]:n ^y jn^x yy jn -^ onb pnb' jn^K DnDD [jd] paan n^n^ jni 124
?iD]ntn »a -inc *» aaa e^sa nin t«h N3i^n3 jpy n^D b«n 125
Col. ix. Sachau, plate 47, col. 1.
rmya nan* K*r6« nob pnvb ion 33-inn bw nnK>[p mn^x 126
■j^y vuvfim
yaeni S>a«n p*w nraj ^3 n3yi t» ^3 nvan na m na^ .... 127
y:ib jnani
nn jni?N jd NDn lao pns!> non nanm nnc^p na[-n jn 128
loy T>aa^ jnam y3B>ni i?3sn n NnDani saan «jr »*ja rr nax . , . 129
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 217
1fc>s:6 fb& Knar t\m [|n bj]k *\mbn nnb na3 pi NrTVjv Nna[T 130
ny d*bt6k
'[a] Ni>oo nmotaoi t[dh *r]a n^n N[nsr ctan] Nna[r 131
nana nntoe> [*a] nnuoM -a* jn *a -pnxa \n[Mron yot?n »t ^a 132
nni2K>
*nw9na fpm nnana p:^[.T pn]^yi b*[. .] Nana^> NNDna pn[pby 133
ttrvrb nay n pna psjxb [Pxann] »? nawi nbnaar&ip nna anao 134
-f np33 k^> jn^N pi 135
1>o yj»» n yash 33nn f>w nanya »! [Dxonta 136
xaa^ Nicnn !>ni ^n ['annta 137
in nn? naA *a [*roi>y c]ok> m-i^x nox ocai *miw oca onn* t6 [n 138
-ion n[oi?] Tra evan "iL3a na -f pnw p Dyi wnb nps3 [ye 139
N"-133^
p Dy [s]non nps: wa p -f ypnv ibk pi Don nnc^ *b m[n 140
nsyw nt^px
on^onp -yov Ws[i] T»[nn] nip ^:n?N T[n
Col. x. Sachau, plate 47, col. 2.
?n*]3a naynta n^o on n ny
np^ <a ddkt6n] n.30 nyi [!>]*¥« "r oy
?epvr] n^r^yi] "]n3o p
dd^ an b*n] dj?i Tyr b»k p xn
, . . ]1 Knoan -po nynnta
inoa]n nyr b[w] "vaa i>anDn ^n
•ppn^Ni] non^N ni[ykr]Sw ^nn ^n
ttrbx onp ik'dj biwn on] mnn n na n3N nav jn
^DK> B*N$> Dn^l (?)Dn E^ W»T »T
jn^N poi^ x]b s'k>[3k] n[ia]B> jioi^ no
. . . paa ao
, . . onn^N Ttfea
. . . noy ba n \rb ion psT
... ^1 *os btn n* nnnt^.T
n]3B6 nD3n Naas* na ^n ■ja^
onT ao Dai ionnD^ ^n po] prrw loax* ^n jatD p['v
nsnoNn so^a
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
5°
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
218 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Col. xi. Sachau, plate 48, col. 1.
♦1VN [najaa [mj3]no t na*on n[n5?]pa ao naa^>i mm -v[aK>] b^« i 59
ma pt6y -103^ noi |n^N Dy c^n noy[H k^ |n 160
WK[l n]irv jo noyta nb »n |D3 n? . , p . . . 161
[Pirns] onaah ion ip^t^ &61 ona nay Nooyi nswn 1 , . . na .' , 16a
n^ nnr nn]^> naj^ at: naa n?[ir] nai nn:a aa^a no k»n [yT n^> 163
n[n^ na]j c[y] ao na: r& nm> xb -uk i>yai [sn-ix]a noy nib* [t6 164
ya[3 ni> "ij^aa [k>]ak> ao no x:o-6 n>3d d^ [k]3»-i^ iitr n^[3D 165
T3[3«2]
la yj: n ny pa [i]b n:s web ioni n[30i] n[ay . . 166
pin \-nn03b mnya nv:x pnv 167
nrra sa nsynn fiyy pwai ^nnn nn ova |y»tn [nn 168
noana i? nan* n saah T^y ntaa *t ^"y -f [ion pnv 169
[KnQimpa >oty nan^i nDso 170
m wmh *3*w ins* nra pa&( *jBab »B3aa wvn pnao jn 171
•£ jwi n^r npb[' 172
Col. xii. Sachau, plate 48, col. 2.
no]b Toy pHvata »3»»pn 173
Joanna vb) "oat? pnw 174
?nn]nDi win nnoa inpat? 175
»N3t8>] nnpmi ^cm? npaa> 176
]•• no yT K^n naa am 177
]d ds nnso »a ^00 o^an 178
]ts> *ni ]3nx 179
]s*a 180
]anya ndd n^s[3 .... 184
]8PB 185
]ndd n^23 N£>n3 n .a. 186
"•] phv nm« ynn n^> »b>b3 187
]mnv[i] Nnnno n^nn11 jaa 188
ion jo rpty e>B3] nnnni Dn^ jo Dya yan&» 189
n , . . vbn Nt?3N 190
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 219
Col. xiii. Sachau, plate 49.
00
]ab) n[on] aaim nntrp -pn in 191
(3) ]i030^ po -jn-io ^ npa» jn 192
?b ?o a]r6x -f "pv3 anr p3CD^ 193
»:o p[*n]-i "]b now ^ni ^y nip n^ «h k . . . 194
r£ [. ,]jp xh rre> . . 195
rup[n} i6 3[33 m]i m« n^[m-n nay] 196
pa[3« j]o h^[n] n[psj] noy nn»3 . . -f 1 . . . 197
ron[»]^ [Nnjvib -ny na nana pp . . [nn-i]ob [-f Kniw n] 198
. bv pK Knaas -f n*in xnx . . , , nsno fi , , , 199
... 3 jB>am n nr£ e^n . . . . 1 n . . . 200
vnwsa ronwn no!> [n^n^] na 1« ♦ . 201
'i nan^y toum nsVrr ♦ . . 202
mp pna t^M • • • • s*ido •■ 203
T^aox [n]3Ni yby [aanx] rmyb nn a . . . 204
nrriN n^ "paan rctn inoai t/!>ud '•[itf i? 205
&na byy bx pra ^kb> pai -i[>a pa 206
H3N -pin nnya N-pny -iok"»!>k -f p 207
197* -fl ik yt
198* ob N35J71
199* nann n
200* 1 n
Col. xiv. Sachau, plate 50.
nE>na unnTay »a B [«n]a wufo kd» 'any^ Mn[nr6« A 208
\n3-io[3]* in . .]oi vuoyo' n Tn Nion ... 209
win* jo nnN^] n jn[» xb]i nayi *5Siij> rvo ttds i . . . 210
T^a . . jo . 3 . jn xmaa . . 3-1 -f H^3 |0 am PD? ... 211
. . . f \rb b . . vi fa .. , 212
y . . p^y -my 213
. . . fh .... B nnw 214
, . *wa D p3^y 215
220
ARAMAIC PAPYRI
. . . pa . . 3 . rn \"t . . . C . . . . b pa*w enrn ^iy . . .
. . . . [S . . . Q]5 xh pma yr ?53 fD . . .
56^ E ... ji n .... n C nh[y]5 k^> E*k n3j5^ i?S . .
, . , M F . . . . G . . w . . H [n]roNi m» [m]a napno . .
. , . iby "] . . . . Sbi n» iv na . . .
, , . n F , , . G 3aA , H [D . , no , , . nio . ,
n^«3 pu»a nyn ns3 nar . .
ny !?j?3 jo . . jbm ....
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
Col. i.
1 These are the words of one named Ahikar, a wise and ready scribe,
who taught his son ... 2 For he said, ' Surely he shall be a son to me '.
Before his words Ahikar had become great and had been counsellor of all
Assyria 3 and bearer of the seal of Senacherib king of Assyria, and he
said: J indeed had no sons and on my counsel 4 and words Senacherib
king of Assyria used to (rely). Then *S>«acherib king of Assyria died
and there arose 5 his son named Esarhaddon and became king in Assyria
instead of Senacherib his father. At that time I said 6 ' / am old and
who shall be to me a son after me to . . .? and who shall be 7 scribe and
bearer of the seal to "Esarhaddon the king, as I was to Senacherib, 8 king
(/"Assyria?' Then I, Ahikar, took Nadin, as he was called, the son of
my sister, and brought him up, 9 and taught him and showed great
kindness (to him), and set him in the gate of the palace with me before the
king among 10 his courtiers. I brought him before Esarhaddon king
of Assyria, and he told him whatever u he asked him. Then Esarhaddon
king of Assyria loved him and said 'hong life be to Ahikar, 12 the wise
scribe, counsellor of all Assyria, who set up as his son, when he had
no son, the son of his sister.' 13 When the king of Assyria had. thus
spoken, I bowed down and made obeisance, I Ahikar, before ~Esa.rhaddon
king of Assyria. 14 And in after days I, Ahikar, when I saw the face of
Esarhaddon king of Assyria favourable, I answered 15 and said before
the king, * I served Senacherib the king your father who was king before you
16 and now behold
Col. ii.
17 I am old. I cannot work in the gate of the palace and do my service
to you. 18 Behold, my son, Nadin by name, is full-grown. Let him
take my place as scribe and counsellor of all Assyria, and let him 19 be.
seal-foarer to you. My wisdom also and my eownsel I have taught him.'
Then answered Esarhaddon 20 king of Assyria and said to me, ' So
indeed it shall be. Four son shall be scribe and seal-bearer to me 21 in
your stead. He shall do your service for me.' Then I, Ahikar, when
I heard 22 the promise ^iven, went away to my house and was resting
in my house. And this my son 23 whom I had brought up and set in the
gate of the palace before Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, among 24 his
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 221
• •
courtiers, I thought, 'He will seek my good in return for that which
I have done for him \ Then 25 the son of my sister whom I had brought
up, imagined against me evil and said in his heart, 26 ' Surely such words
as these can I say, " This Ahikar, the old man, who was seal-bearer
27 to Senacherib the king your father has corrupted the land against you,
for he is a counsellor and a skilful 28 scribe and by his counsel and wort/j
all Assyria was {guided)." Then Esarhaddon 23 will be greatly troubled
when he hears words like these which I shall speak to him, and zvill kill
Ahikar.' Then 30 when my son who was not my son, had devised this >
falsehood against me 31
Col. iii.
32 Then was ^Varhaddon king of Assyria filled with rage and said,
33 ' Let there come to me Nabusumiskun one of the officers of my father,
who ate the bread of my father.' 34 The king said, ' You are to seek
Ahikar (in) a place which you shall find 35 and kill him. Even if this
Ahikar, the old man, is a skilful scribe 36 and counsellor of all Assyria,
why should he corrupt the land against us?' Then when 37 the king
of Assyria, had thus spoken, he appointed with him 2 other men to see
how 38 it would be done. This iVa3usumiskun the officer went away
riding on a swift horse of his, 39 and those men with him. Then after
three more days indeed 40 he, with other men who were with him, saw
me while I was walking among the vineyards. 41 And when this
Ara<5usumiskun the officer saw me then he rent his clothes, lamenting,
42 and said, ' Are you he, the skilful scribe, giver of good counsel, who
43 was a righteous man and by whose counsel and words all Assyria was
(guided) ? 44 The son whom you brought up, whom you set in the gate
of the palace, has injured you (?) ; he has ruined you, and 45 an evil
return is it.' Then I, Ahikar, indeed was afraid. I answered and said
to Nabusum?'j/^«« 46 the officer, ' {Yes, and) also I am that Ahikar who
formerly saved you from an undeserved death 47 when Senacherib the
father of this Esarhaddon, the king, was angry with you 48 to kill you.
Then I took you to my house. There I was supporting you
Col. iv.
49 as a man (deals) with his brother, and I hid you from him. I said,
" I have killed him ", until in after time and many days 50 after, I brought
you before king Senacherib and took away your offences before him, and
he did you no evil. 61 Moreover king Senacherib was well pleased with
me that I had kept you alive and had not killed you. Now 52 according
as I did to you, so do also to me. Do not kill me. Take me to your
house until other days. 53 King Esarhaddon is kind as any man (?).
Hereafter he will remember me and desire my counsel. Then you
54 shall bring me to him and he shall let me live.' Then answered
Nabusumiskun the officer and said to me, ' Fear not. Surely 55you
shall live, Ahikar, father of all Assyria, by whose counsel king Senacherib
and all the army of Assyria 56 were (guided).' Then Nabusumiskun
the officer said to his companions, those two men who were with him,
57 ' Hearken, indeed, and listen to me, and I will tell you my counsel,
222 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
and it is a good counsel 58 exceedingly.' Then answered those two ?nen
and said to him, ' Tell us indeed, Nabusumiskun the officer, 59 what you
think, and we zvill listen to you.' Then answered Nabusu?niskun the
officer and said to them, ' Hear me, 80 indeed this Ahikar was a great
man and bearer of the seal to king Esarhaddon, and by his counsel and
words G1 all the army of Assyria, were (guided). Let us not kill him
undeservedly. A slave, a eunuch of mine, I will give to you. 62 Let
him be killed between these two mountains instead of this Ahikar, and
whew it is heard, the king will .rend other men 63 after us to see the
body of this Ahikar. Then they will see the body of this eunuch my
slave,
Col. v.
64 until afterwards Esarhaddon the king remembers Ahikar and desires
his counsel, and grieves 65 over him. and the heart of Esarhaddew the
king shall turn to me and he shall say to his officers and courtiers,
66 " I will give you riches as the num^r of the sand if you find Ahikar."
And this counsel 67 seemed good to his companions, those tzvo men.
They answered and said to Nabusumiskun, the officer, 68 ' Do according
as you think. Let us not kill him, but you shall give us that slave,
09 the eunuch, instead of Ahikar here. He shall be killed between these
two mountains? 70 At that time it was reported in the country of Assyria,
saying, 'Ahikar the scribe of Esarhaddon 71 the king is killed.' Then
Nabusu??iiskun, that officer, look me to his house and hid me, also 72 he
sustained me there as a man {deals) with his brother, and said to me . . .
' Bread and water 73 shall be carried to my lord ' . . . 74 abundant
sustenance (?) and (other) things in plenty. Then Nabusumiskun, that
officer, 75 went to Esarhaddon the king and said to him, ' According as
you conunanded me, so have I done. 76 I went and found that Ahikar
and killed him.' And when king Esarhaddon 77 heard this he asked the
\wo men whom he had appointed with Nabusumiskun and they said, ' So
it was, as 78 he says.' Then as long as king "Esarhaddon
Col. vi.
79 What is stronger than wine foaming in the pr^ss ? 80 The son who
is trained and taught, and on whose feet the fetter is put shall prosper.
81 Withhold not thy son from the rod, if thou canst not keep him from
wickedness. 82 If I smite thee, my son, thou wilt not~die, and if I leave
(thee) to thine own heart thou ivilt not live. 83 A blow for a slave, rebuke
for a maid, and for all thy servants discipline. A man who si buys
a licentious slave (or) a thievish maid brings anxiety into his house, and
disgraces 85 the name of his father and his* offspring with the reputation
of his wantonness. The scorpion finds 86 bread and does not eat in
order that he may live, but it is too good for him to taste. 87
thou hast done the blood of the hind ... 88 The lion devours (?)
the hart in the secrecy of (his) den (?), and he . . . 89 and will shed his
blood and eat his flesh : so is the contact of men. From fear of the lion
90 the ass left his burden and will not carry it. He shall bear shame
before his fellow and shall bear a b«rden which is not his, 91 and shall
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 223
be laden with a camel's load. The ass made obeisance to the she-ass
from love of her, and the birds ... 92 Two things are a merit (?), and
of three there is pleasure to Shamash : one who drinks wine and gives
it (to others), one who restrains (?) wisdom . . . 93 and he hears a word
and does not reveal (it). Behold, this is precious before Shamash. But
one who drinks wine and does not give it to others °4 and his wisdom
goes astray who sees ? . . . Thou hast placed the peoples
their wisdom the gods . . .
Col. vii,
95 Even to gods is it precious, to it tor ever belongs the kingdom, in
heaven it is treasured up, for the lord of holiness has exalted it. 96 My
son, do not chatter overmuch till thou reveal every word 97 which comes
into thy mind, for in every place are their eyes and their ears ; but keep
watch over thy mouth, let it not be thy destruction (?). 98 More than
all watchfulness watch thy mouth, and over what thou nearest harden
thy heart, for a word is (like) a bird, and when he has sent it forth
a man does not recapture z'/(?). " Count the secrets of thy mouth,
afterwards bring forth (advice) to thy brother for his help, for stronger
is the ambush of the mouth than the ambush of fighting. 10° Suppress •£+.
not the word of a king : let it be a healing to thy brother. Soft is the
speech of a king, (but) it is sharper and stronger than a two-edged knife.
Z*01 Behold before thee something hard : in presence of a king delay not.
Swifter is his anger than lightning. Do thou take heed to thyself.
102 Let him not show it at thy words, that thou go away before thy time.
103 In presence of a king, if (a thing) is commanded thee, it is a burning
fire ; hasten, do it ; do not put sackcloth upon thee and hide thy hands,_/or
104 also the word of a king is with wrath of heart. Why should wood
strive with fire, flesh with a knife, a man with a king ? 105 I have tasted
even the bitter sloe, and the taste was strong, but there is nothing which
is more bitter than poverty. Soft is the tongue of a king 106 but it
breaks the ribs of a dragon, like death which is not seen. In a multitude
of children let not thy heart exult, and in the lack of them be not thou
ashamed. 107 A king is like the merciful (?) : even his voice is high :
who is he that can stand before him, except one who is like (?) him?
108 Glorious is a king to see, like Shamash, and precious is his sovereignty
to those who walk on the earth in tranquillity. 109 A good vessel hides
a thing wilhin itself, but one that is broken lets it go forth. no The lion
went near to greet the ass saying, ' Peace be to thee \ The ass answered
and said to the lion ......
Gol. viii.
111 I have lifted sand and carried salt, and there is nothing which is
heavier than debt. 112 I have lifted chaff and taken up crumbs, and there
is nothing which is lighter than (to be) a sojourner. H3 A sword will
trouble calm waters whether they be bad (or) good. n* A little man
when he multiplies his words, they fly away(?) above him, for the
opening of his mouth ... 115 gods, and if he were beloved of (the)
gods they would put something good in his palate to speak. 11G Many
224 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
are the stars 0/ heaven whose names man knows not: so man knows not
. men. m There is no lion in the sea, therefore they call the .... lion(?).
\(A> /us The leopard met the goat and she was cold. The leopard answered
and said to the goat, ' Come, and I will cover thee with my hide.'
119 The goat answered and said to the leopard, ' What hast thou to do
with me, my lord? Take not my skin from me.' For he does not
120 salute the kid except to suck its blood. The master (?) went to
the sheep 121 I will be silent. The sheep answered and said to
him, 'Take for thyself what thou wilt lake from us. We are thy sheep.'
122 por it js not jn the power of men to lift up their foot and to put
them down without (the) gods. 123 For it is not in thy power to lift
thy foot and to put it down. If there goes forth good from the mouth
of men, it is well, m and if a curse shall go forth from their mouth, (the)
gods will curse them. If the eyes of (the) gods are over men 125 a man
cuts (?) wood in the dark and does not see, like a thief who breaks into(?)
a house and escapes (?).
Col. ix.
126 Bend not thy bow and shoot not thy arrow at the righteous, lest
God come to his help and turn it back upon thee. 127 do thou,
O my son, gather every harvest, and do every work, then thou shalt eat
and be filled and give to thy children. 128 ^"thou hast bent thy bow and
shot thy arrow at one who is more righteous than thou, it is a sin in the
sight of God. 129 do thou, O my son, borrow corn and wheat
that thou mayest eat and be filled and give to thy children with thee.
130 A heavy loan and from a wicked man, borrow not, ana? if thou
borrow take no rest to thy soul till 131 thou pay back the loan. A loan
is pleasant when there is need, but the paying of it is the filling of a house.
132 All that thou hearest thou mayest try by thy ears, for the beauty of
a man is his faithfulness, for his hatefulness is the lying of his lips.
133 At first the throne is set up for the liar, but at \asl his lies shall find
(him) out, and they shall spit in his face. 134 A liar has his neck cut,
like a maiden of the south (?) who hides (?) (her) face, like a man who
makes a curse 135 which came not forth from (the) gods. 136 Despise
not that which is in thy lot, and covet not some great thing which is
withheld from thee. m Increase not riches, and lead not (thy) heart
astray. 138 He who is not proud of(?) the name of his father and the
name of his mother, let not the sun shine upon him, for he is an evil man.
139 prom myself has my curse gone forth, and with whom shall I be
justified ? The son of my body has spied out (?) my house, and what
can I say to strangers ? uo There was a cruel witness against me, and
who then has justified me ? From my own house went forth wrath, with
whom shall I strive and toil? U1 Thy secrets reveal not before thy
friends, that thy name be not lightly esteemed before them.
Col. x.
142 With one that is higher than thou, do not go (?) to quarrelling (?).
143 With one that is a noble (?) and stronger than thou, contend not, for
he will take Ui of thy portion and will add it to his own. 145 Behold,
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 225
so is a little man who contends with a great man. 146 Remove not
wisdom from thee, and .... 147 Be not over crafty, and let not thy wisdom
be extinguished. 148 Be not sweet lest they swallozv thee up. Be not
bitter, lest they spit thee out. 149 If thou, my son, wouldst be exalted,
humble thyself before God 150 who humbles the lofty man and exalts /he
humble man. 151 How can the lips of men curse when (the) gods curse
not? 152 Better is he that restrains . . . 153 Let not thy soul love ....
lr>4 heal them, except one who is like him. 155 My hands shall destroy,
and .... 156 God (?) shall turn back the mouth of the unjust (?) and
shall tear out his tongue. 157 Good eyes shall not be darkened and good
ears shall not be stopped, and a good mouth will love 158 the truth and
speak it.
Col. xi.
u>9 A man exceWent in character and whose heart is good is like a strong
bow which is bent by a strong man. 160 If a man stand not with (the)
gods, how shall he be saved by (?) his own strength ? lel
belly and that which is like it, who shall be judging him (?) ? 162
.... men, and peoples pass over them and do not leave them, and their
heart is ... . 163 A man knows not what is in the heart of his fellow,
and when a good man .s^es an evil man he will beware of him, 164 he will
not accompany him on a journey, and will not hire him — a good man
with an evil man. /™5 The bramble sent to tlit pomegranate saying,
' Bramble to Pomegranate, what is the good of thy many thorns to him
who /ouches thy fruit ?' 166 . . . . the pomegranate answered and said
to the bramble, ' Thou art all thorns to him who touches thee.' 1C7 The
righteous among men, all who meet him are for his help (?). 1G8 The
house of wicked men in the day of storm shall be destroyed (?), and in
calm (?) its gates shall fall (?), for the spoiling of 1C9 the righteous are they.
My eyes which I lifted up on thee and my heart which I gave thee
in wisdom, 17° thou hast despised and hast turned my name into wanton-
ness. 1T1 If the wicked take hold of the skirts of thy garment, leave
(it) in his hand. Then approach (?) Shamash. He m will take his
and give it to thee.
Col. xii.
173 God set me up as a righteous man with thee, why .... m My
enemies shall die, but not by my sword .... 175 I left thee in a hiding-
place of cedar, and thou hast gone about ... 176 Thou hast left thy
friends and hast honoured my enemies. m Pity (?) a man who knows
not what he . . . 178 A wise man speaks, for the opening of the mouth
of . . . 179-183 184 ... the moth fell into ... 185
. . . 186 Into a house (?) of bronze the moth fell ... 187 My soul knows
not its path, therefore ... 188 Hunger sweetens that which is bitter and
thirst ... 189 Let him that is vexed be satisfied with bread, and the
soul of the poor be sated with wine. 19° Men
Col. xiii.
191 One bent his bow and shot his arrow, and it did not .... 192 If thy
lord entrust to thee water to keep ... 193 to leave gold in thy hand. Do
1- 99 Q
225 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
not ... 1!U come near to me, and let him not say, ' Be far from
me '. 195 106 a slave on whose foot is a fetter and who
is a thief should not be bought. m his house with him, a fire
went forth iroin bAoxe 198 God. He who accuses his lord shall be
^///rapped in his law-suit, as if he uttered a curse on his lord. 199 . . .
... his lord The birds ... 200 an evil man who over-
takes ... 201 thee when he sends thee, why shouldst thou be
changed in his sight ? 202 his sight because 203 before
thee tested before 204 one to the wild ass ' Let me ride upon
thee and I will feed thee.' 205 keep for thyself thy feeding and
thy saddle, but I will not see thy riding. 206 between flesh and
shoe let him not put a pebble into my foot. 20T Let not the
rich man say, ' In my riches I am glorious '.
Col. xiv.
208 jj0 noi snow to an Arab the sea or to a Sidonian the desert, for
their work is different (?). 209 He who treads out the wine is he who
should taste it, and he who ... he should guard it. 210 and
/know not what will come after it. 2U . . . he shall tear out, and blood
from my skin 212 213 blind in the eyes . . .
214 he shall come ... 215 eyes ... 21° . . . a child and
a deaf man, ears ... 217 . . . from the belly one (?) knows a noble
person, and not from ... 218 ... let not a man buy either a married
woman ... 219 let a maid be bought as a maid, and a wife ... 220 . . .
221 thief ... 222 . . . this, the house of his neighbour
caught (?) fire ... 223 . . . merciful . . . owner . . .
Line r is clearly the beginning. The first words are probably "90 i"i7N
(so Baneth), cf. Prov. 2423 and n2T Prov. 301, 311. Noldeke proposes
^TIE) (cf. Prov. i1), which would imply that the narrative is merely an
introduction to the maxims. HE^ ' by name ', a Persian idiom
frequent in this text, but also occurring in the other papyri, cf. e.g. 331-5.
THEl 'n ""I2D not only a scribe but a learned man. In Hebrew cf.
Ezra 76. The end of the line is difficult to restore, and none of the
suggestions are convincing. The remains of the letter after n"G? are not
a 1 or t but part of n or D. One would expect some word to show
that he was not really a son.
Line 2. [""D] only a guess to fit the space. It will depend on the
restoration of 1. 1. ni.T a future, not precative (liT). Ti^p©.
The Vt are practically certain. The phrase seems to mean ' before this
narrative begins'. ^[^] ' had become great', more probable than
roy (Baneth). It continues in the 3rd person with occasional quotations
in the 1st person. The composition of these first lines is difficult, and
one cannot be sure where the 1st person takes up the story.
Line 3. rvfnTi] Epstein? Perles rotf. The < is certain, and there is
part of the foot of 2, so that there is no doubt about the word. It is
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 227
Bab. saint, 'bearer ' of the seal. nnpry cf. Dan. 618. n[JN| is practically
certain. The end seems to be required by *?m in 1. 4. Note the
Persian form ninN and the Assyrian 3"nxm'B> .
Line 4. ^D not sta (as Sachau? and Ungnad). To take as 'full'
(of years) seems impossible. ?]} . , . fflfl i. e. relied upon. Cf. 1. 43.
Line 5. H^rriDX (Ungnad) the Assyrian form. [pT»]3. The 3 is
doubtful, and the restoration uncertain. The line is long because VKUff
is written above PPI3.
Line 6 is too much broken to be restored with any certainty, and
so too 1. 7. Baneth proposes ' I took my sister's son, Nadin by name, . . .'
but it seems too soon to introduce the adoption of Nadin, which ought to
come just before line 9. The vacant space may have had something
like 'to do my service', cf. 11. 17, 21, but I cannot fill it up satisfactorily.
The h is probable.
Line 8. The account of the adoption seems to come in most naturally
here, beginning with *intt.
Line 9. After STDUl a verb is wanted, and the tail of a n is visible,
but [rvat?]ri is not a very convincing conjecture. '31 [nno,|p]n[l] from
1. 23. ["'Joy- Epstein nray (joined with the preceding words), but
this verb is rarely (if ever) found (1. 160) in the papyri. At the end the
king must be mentioned to account for vmJD ' his courtiers ' in 1. 10.
Line 10. T\TOT\p i. e. I brought him specially to the notice of the king.
[sncjn:]» is no doubt right, cf. 3012.
Line 11. [|tOj]B> is probably right, with pn. If the fragment on the
left is rightly placed, WP is probable, for there are traces of in on it. The
3rd person (therefore a name "ip'riN^), not *]^>, is required by D^pn in
1. 12. But the restoration is rather long.
Line 13. The first letters remaining must belong to 1l[rix] which
implies "j^E preceding. Therefore the king's remarks ended with 1. 12,
and the beginning of 1. 13 must be the protasis of a new sentence of
which the apodosis begins with n:nj .
Line 14. [jnnN J»vS] cf. 11. 39, 49. At the end, nothing after rV3y.
Line 15. [m»Nl] is required after rCjy. [fi]3N must begin Ahikar's
statement of his case which is continued in 1. 17. [nrvs] from 1. 17,
but it does not quite fill the space.
Line 16. Only slight traces remain. It must have formed the transition
to 1. 17.
Line 17. (PI. 41.) At least half of this column is lost. 33 isi
Babylonian for Aramaic jnn as in I. 44. The restoration of the end
is not by any means certain. Cf. Lai.
Q 2
228 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Line 18. pi is a short form of some Assyrian name like Assur-
nadin-apli (Ungnad). K3"). The following 1 shows that it is not an
adjective, but a verb (so Baneth) ' is grown up ', cf. Dan. 419, though one
would expect H3"l, as in 1. 2. '31 ^>rr< must mean 'he shall succeed
me as scribe', Arab, i—ali., cf. Mesha inscr. 1. 6 (Ungnad). The
restoration is probably right, as npTy 1. 19 shows that the regular formula
was used.
Line 19, beginning as 1. 3. The restoration of the end must be right.
[TID]yi is the only possible word, and 'dk i"!3y is required by the
beginning of 1. 20. The only word which is doubtful is nncon, but
nothing belter suggests itself.
Line 20. sniD is not a title (as Sachau), nor is it connected with
'Meskin Kanti ' applied to Nabusumiskun in the Syriac and Arabic
versions, see Story, p. 112, n. 1, and p. xxxv. It is simply an adverb
' so ' formed from Din ' like '. [m]iT is above the line, which is
consequently long. The end is from 11. 2 and 3. For "j~Q perhaps
read in.
Line 21. yQ7n 'instead of you' begins a new sentence. The end
is probable if the beginning of 1. 22 is right.
Line 22. NITI^], as Noldeke, seems the only possible completion.
^ ethical dative, as often with a verb of motion. TP22 PVin rb&\ from
Dan. 41, is only a guess. HJT 'H31 is required by 1. 23.
Line 24. ^[rViTiD] there is perhaps a trace of n. Noldeke and Lidz-
barski propose "'["D], but it cannot be "1, and more is needed to fill
the space. m£X 'I said to myself i. e. I thought. [*?y n]yn'1 seems
probable as the contrast to [^y nK>y in 1. 25. The rest is only a guess,
cf. 1. 52.
Line 25. M"l[nN *n] is certain. The trace of n is fairly clear.
[snK^Nl] is required as the opposite to NJ130 in 1. 24. The rest depends
on the way in which 1. 26 is filled up.
Line 26. Epstein and Noldeke propose 73X ["'Vnp] 'he maligned',
continuing ^y ns?y in 1. 25. Then 1. 26 might begin [n:)7]D7. But
there is a trace of 7 before 7DN, leaving room for a narrow letter like
J, and J7D is suggested by 1. 29. If this is read, 73X must be 'I can',
and 1CN (future) is required after it. Then the ' words ' followed, as
shown by 1. 27, addressed to the king.
Line 27. The restoration is partly from 1. 36, which should repeat the
terms of the accusation. [iSd] is required by D^n in 1. 28. He was
able to stir up the country against the king because he had won its
confidence by his wisdom.
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 229
Line 28. [nin] 'di 'y bjfl cf. 11. 4, 43, 55.
Line 29. B>"i-p ' will be enraged', still part of the statement of Nadin's
contemplated plan, which must end in this line. y»B>. For the con-
struction cf. 33"| in I. 38. Something is wanted to define J^O, not
*pN, nor a relative clause, since either of these would require tffbo.
I have proposed n?N3 here and in 1. 26 'words to this effect', because
Nadin need not be rehearsing the exact terms of his slander, but the
trace of a letter after ytDB> is certainly more like r. Perhaps after all the
relative did follow, rather incorrectly, and !"6k3 should be omitted.
Line 30. '31 N"Q. So Epstein. It might of course be (;nn]i03
written together as being one idea, like N^TDn — ' my son who was not
my son (but) the son of my sister '. The rest of this and the next
line must have described how he went to the king and made his charge,
but there is nothing to guide us in restoring the lacuna.
Plate 42. This column is fairly complete on the left-hand side. The
amount lost on the right is shown by 1. 37 where the restoration is
almost certain. After the short line 43 the lines are slightly longer, and
there is a good deal of difference in length throughout the column.
Line 32. Restored from Dan. 319. But perhaps we should read sojt?
SMPI from 1. 29. Baneth proposes my before psm[DN], which would
require something else at the beginning.
Line 33 has been much discussed. It has been assumed that Ahikar
is speaking, and that therefore 'ON is Ahikar's father. But the words
are clearly spoken by the king, and "QX is Senacherib, for "IDN1 1. 32
must be 'he (Esarhaddon) said'. "Q*l is pi. constr. of NUT, used
frequently of Nabusumiskun, the Assyr. rabii (Ungnad) ' a great man ',
' officer ', not ' youth ', ' page ' as Baneth. From 11. 46-50 it appears
that Nabusumiskun had been in the service of Senacherib, and must
have been a person of some age and dignity. Nabusumiskun must have
been mentioned by name before 1. 38 where his name first appears in
the extant text, and there seems to.be no other place than this. ^[n]-
There are traces of Pi.
Line 34 must begin with ^3K, or P3N-. Then, since the line goes on
in the 2nd person (rox), something ("TON) is required to introduce the
change. The words to be restored after ^3N are very uncertain, but
it seems necessary that Ahikar should be mentioned by name in the
command. The connexion of 11. 33-36 is however very difficult.
ny3D. Baneth takes this from y3n ' seek him wherever . . .', but that
late formation can hardly be assumed here. Though the phrase is
230 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
difficult, it may be ' thou shalt seek (nys) Ahikar in a place which thou
shalt find' i.e. find a suitable place and then fall upon him there.
Not ' seek him wherever (T "IDN) thou shalt find him ', which would be
(rt3) nrDBTIJl *T. Or the object of h3Bfin may have begun 1. 35, forming
some phrase implying that he was to be killed, without the use of the
direct term bop, e. g. n^y (or STi^y) rb nx>nn, cf. Dan. 65. Then n ~>nx
would be ' where ' as in Ezra 63.
Line 35 may begin with Ti^ttpm or with some phrase like that
suggested above. The name of Ahikar can hardly have stood here as
object to rutrnn , since it is used just afterwards. "6:n (Epstein, Noldeke)
is no doubt right. ' If he is wise, why does he . . . ? ' i. e. he may be
very clever, but he shall not . . . The line is very short.
Line 36. The first "I is fairly certain. It is too broad for 1, as
Noldeke (n»?l). KTIO Assyr. mdtu, does not occur elsewhere in these
papyri nor in BA, though it is common later. [Restored in Beh., 11. 16, 17.]
Line 37. noy i.e. with Nabusumiskun, so that he must have been
mentioned before (cf. 1. 33). TWV\u? more probable in this context
than nrn tb, cf. 1. 63.
Line 38. The beginning should be ' (how) the order would be carried
out'. Perhaps "ay or *nyh\ [b)X] or bfN1 is wanted, taking um
as a participle. pDDDl[2:]. Ungnad points out that a person of this
name was a high official under Senacherib. Perhaps the story had an
historical foundation. W2*\ he was '3B> »3*1 )D in (1. 33). in HD1D1
' on a horse of his ', not feminine. A distinguished officer would not
have ridden a mare. [/] vp ' hght ' i. e. swift.
Line 39. The restoration is certain. It is a short line. ~b 'after
the lapse of.
Line 40. The lacuna in the middle is difficult. Some word is wanted
like ' met ', ' found me '. The letter before it is taken as Q by Noldeke
and Epstein, who complete it as [iyj]s. But this would require a com-
plement b iyA3 (cf. 1. 118) for which there is not room. If yjaa were
possible (?) the space might perhaps (?) allow of it. Then the line would
have to begin p3: DJ7 in . But the letter may be part of a n , not D at all.
Then the reading [^irjn or [w]n would be obvious.
Line 41. The construction depends on the restoration of the middle
of the line. Baneth's WQIp is almost certain from the remains of
the letters. It occurs in 11. 56, 59, where the obvious meaning ' battles '
is clearly unsuitable. Baneth makes it an adverb from 3"ip (' near ')
meaning ' soon ', ' then ', used like "inN. For the form he compares N?y,
N"13, Kni3 (1. 20). Such an adverb is not otherwise known, but it would
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 231
certainly fit these passages. If it is read here, it must begin the apodosis,
and the first part of the line must contain the protasis, somewhat as
restored. [^Tn]. For the form cf. '•ana 149, D3BH 2512. ^>VI perf.
Haphel of ?b\ asyndeton.
Line 42. The restoration at the beginning is certain, since it must
correspond to in HJN in 1. 46.
Line 43. [p^ltf] is only a guess. Some word of the kind is required.
If mn is used like lin in 1. 61 ('was dependent on'), the sentence ends
with N?3. Of the next word, which should bigin a new sentence,
only 1 is certain, and , is probable. The second letter is 3 or 1 or 1 ,
the third may be y (or T, 1?). Nbldeke, Epstein ~\]}2\ If 1 is the
pronoun, the verb cannot be future as that would require "p~. If it is
radical *pT or "]!2't are the only possibilities, and neither gives a sense.
Of roots beginning with , only yY> is possible, and that gives no sense.
I suggest yT as a collateral form of J?m, 'has injured thee', but it is not
satisfactory. If the broken ' could be disregarded "J13 would be simple.
Line 44. n[*3"l ""i] is necessary. The first word depends on the
reading of 1. 43. inn the proper Aramaic, for which 33 is used in
11. 9, 23. N31D1 has been much discussed. Epstein proposes N31H1
N*n3["l Nn?m Nnrnb 3n], but that is impossible and is in any case too
long. Baneth makes it an adverb = 3in (as in i7, 912) = ' moreover ', see
note on 1. 41 for the form. It is probably only a noun from 310 and
means 'recompense'.
Line 45. Nn3[~)p] is Baneth's conjecture, and is probable, but it
would make his N3in impossible, for two adverbs of nearly the same
meaning could not come so close together. Otherwise we might restore
Nn3[m »n NB^N3] ' the return is an evil return ', but two consecutive
asyndeta n^J? . , . rbr\1 would then be difficult.
Line 46. [N'Ol] is the regular title of Nab., cf. 11. 54, 56, &c. Some
particle is wanted with the sense ' Yes, and also (it is I who) '. Neither
J]X nor D? is quite satisfactory. 12] 7®p no doubt means an ' innocent
(i. e. unmerited) death '.
Line 48. Nn[31p] is again Baneth's reading, and it certainly suits the
context. Or we might read ^[{^3 72ynb] cf. 11. 50, 51. ^>3DE)
' supporting ' (with food, &c.) as elsewhere in these texts.
Plate 43 contains parts of two columns. Col. i evidently follows on
pi. 42, and col. ii must follow col. i. Col. i is broad and well preserved
in the earlier part.
Line 50. 3HXn3D with D as in 11. 51, 55, more correctly. The spelling
with c? is due to the Assyrian confusion of D and C? (Ungnad).
232 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Line 52. ISN a mere strengthening of C)K, cf. DSK 58 &c. In both
forms the addition is probably the pronoun, which has lost its proper
meaning. 1&2 imperat. of ^2\ JOV7 [*l]y not 'b ♦? ny (Ungnad),
for which there is hardly room. The next line begins a new sentence.
Line 53. jnjco. Torczyner ' bekanntlich ', which does not seem
probable. Can it mean ' any one ', ' a person ' ? 'riN ?y yi3»3 would
then be equivalent to \TiriN Dy B*K3 1. 49. pnN b]) however may be
'afterwards' (so Torczyner) as in 1. 64, cf. Dan. 4s. ["in]x probably,
or [}HJk.
Line 55. ^[nn] is no doubt right. Epstein and Noldeke propose
M[2N] = ' patricius '. Baneth " [n:x] for n*= ' oh '. D? rather demands
a verb here.
Line 56. [lin N73] as in 1. 61. There are traces of N and the final 1.
Nnmp 'then' (Baneth) is simplest. Ungnad takes it as 'battles' and
supplies iin piy.
Line 57. Dn:K fits the space better than yin (nvy n). The words
following are fairly certain. "hv not Ny (Ungnad) which is not a word,
and there is a blank space before it. The b and » have been run
together.
Line 58. WiSJ is certain, and 13y is required before it. Of inx part
of the n remains. Of N^^ there is a trace of N. Epstein *? nONl is
unsuitable.
Line 59. The beginning is Baneth's restoration. From the traces of
letters remaining "ids njX T is almost certain. It appears to mean
' what you think ', which is strange just after *1EN in its ordinary sense.
Nn3"lp as in 1. 56. The next words are necessary.
Line 60. [jV2¥l] is probably right, cf. 1. 3. Noldeke proposes N?sn]:n
Hp[Tyi. l[n N37EJ. The words must have been written wide apart to fill
the space, but there is hardly room for l[n Tinx j?o].
Line 61. nn. The meaning 'were dependent on' is necessary here.
It is plural agreeing in sense with TTI. Before DHD Noldeke supplies
Dvy, but the trace of a letter is more like 1 than D, and rather more
is required to fill the space. ['•at] from 1. 46. is wanted as a reason
for not killing him.
Line 62. ropri'1 is written above the line. [|],_3 is more probable
than [l]:3 as Ungnad. n[?N] so Noldeke, Lidzbarski. The expression
is strange. JPBnB" from 1. 70. Baneth [priN ?y »]T31 which is less
satisfactory.
Line 63. pin[N] is fairly certain. ' After us ' ? (as Baneth). Noldeke,
Epstein }Hn[K]. Then mas must be the object of nrriD?, which is
awkward. n[jr] above the line.
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 433
Plate 43, col. ii. Less than half the width of the column is preserved,
containing the beginnings of the lines.
Line 64. The restoration is from 1. 53. [B>NTl] is from Dan. 61"',
' it shall be evil upon him ', i. e. he \\ ill regret it.
Line 65. The restoration is of course only a conjectural approximation.
Line 66. ["is]DCO seems to be the only possible word, and this
requires something like K^n after it. The rest of the line must contain
the end of the speech, and the resumption of the narrative with a subject
to m<D in 1. 67.
Line 67. Restoration probably right. Tt thus gives the length of the
lines in this column.
Line 68. Restored from 1. 61, but the line is short.
Line 69. Restored from 1. 62, but again the line is short.
Line 70. An abrupt transition. jPDnt2>K for yon^n. The reading
is clear. Noldeke completes the line [cb N^3 Nn]ca and the rest much
as here but rather too long.
Line 71. Restored from 11. 48, 49, to which this passage is evidently
related.
Line 72 must contain a direct statement by Nab. to introduce p^ariD*
— not a command, which would require tariDV [tJ^NJa Ungnad reads
[ Jjtt and Epstein [v Nnajjn. But ND is certain.
Line 73. w*iD 'my lord', i.e. you, Ahikar. [j]n is rather more
probable than [D]n. The line is difficult to restore.
Line 74. ^3D. Seidel takes it as a noun = 'food' cf. b)2D 43*. It
might however be a verb '(bread, &c.) he brought'. JMJ not
' Schatze ' (as Ungnad) which would have been of no use to him, nor
' goods ', but in a weakened sense, ' things ', i. e. necessaries. The
restoration is fairly certain.
Line 77. Restored from 1. 37.
Line 78 does not admit of restoration. This is the end of the narrative
part.
Plate 44 begins the proverbs.
Lines 80-85 are the same group as in the Syriac 22-26.
Line 79. At first sight one would compare no. 8 in the Syriac. So
Noldeke, who restores ND[,]2 and takes "ij?3 IDn as ' braying ass \ But
this gives no construction. Baneth xn[l]a as in 1. 90 ' what is stronger
. . . ? The burden ', but this meaning for ni3 is quite uncertain.
Wensinck Nnf'Ojn, for which there is not room. *iyj ion may also
mean ' fermenting wine ' (Perles) and this allows of the simple restoration
2j4 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Nn[j]3. It is true this is a Hebraism, for H3 is not found in Targum
(though it is in Syriac) but there are other Hebraisms in this
text — or are they common Semitic ? The proverb must then have
been ' (there are various strong things but) what is stronger than wine
foaming in the press ? ' Alluding to the intoxicating effect of new wine.
There is nothing after sn[3]3 in this line.
Line 80. "iDn* more probably from "iDN than from ID*. The X is
dropped as in "lOft? (perhaps) and baft?, and in later Aramaic. 'Is
restrained '. NmN must mean a ' fetter ' or something similar. In
Onkelos it (or NrTHK) translates Heb. DID, which is elsewhere used
as a symbol of oppression. It must refer here to some form of punish-
ment by tying the legs to a bar, or the stocks. The end must have been
'shall prosper in later life', or something of the kind. Cf. Syr. 22,
Arm. 14 and Arabic.
Line 81. )b |n = 1% Cf. Prov. 2314 (^W1 h»B>C)). 'If you cannot
keep him out of mischief, then beat him.' Cf. Syr. 22.
Line 82. Cf. Prov. 2%ls. The occurrence of the same idea in two
consecutive lines in both places cannot be accidental. fp3t5W. Seidel
eft. inTf Hab. 217 and concludes that, with }" etiergicum, the pronominal
suffix may be omitted, if the sense is clear. Maiti rejects this, but it
seems probable, cf. 35s, &c. At the end something short is wanted,
like 'thou wilt not prosper'. Cf. Armenian 14.
Line 83. nsno a noun (Noldeke, Wensinck). [iT]N3 so Noldeke,
cf. Syr. Jj>a. Baneth and Sachau [lD]fcO, which is possible from the
traces remaining, but does not give a very good sense, fl is more
probable at the end. roi"6. The b must be the preposition, therefore
not ' concubine ' as in BA. The meaning ' maid-servant ' is required
here for run, cf. Sayce and Cowley, Ostr. M b 1. [N3B]7K. A noun
is required as before. There is a trace of a, cf. c^Nn"1 in 1. 80. Cf. again
Syr. 22. At the end something is wanted to introduce 1. 84. If
11. 92-94 give the approximate width cf the column, several words would
be required here, since the line must apparently have read straight on.
Line 84. [p]lD is better than [Tjna (as Epstein). nooj HON is
certain, but a conjunction is necessary, either 1 of which there is no trace,
or IN for which there is no room. [*T"l]a uncertain, and not very
suitable. in. The n is almost certain. After it Ungnad reads b,
but the upper stroke is really the tail of the *] in 1. 83. We might read
either [^J?]:n or [i?J?jn] in. At the end a connexion with 1. 85 is
wanted. The lines all seem to be short before 1. 89, so that either the
column was narrower above than below, or the fragment attached to it
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 235
from 1. 89 onwards does not really belong there. Cf. I. 170 and
Syr. 24, Arab. 25.
Line 86. The form of this proverb is very uncertain. It seems to
mean that the scorpion refuses bread because he cannot appreciate it,
his natural food being insects and vermin. ^[^Nj"1 N?1 Dr6 is probable.
There is not room for »nJ73N\ The next word is very doubtful. There
is a mark of a ? (but not high enough), but nTl 73 (' he will not eat
anything living') is unsuitable, because that is just what he does eat.
■7
Perhaps it is DTP y.
Line 87 is too much broken to restore. [n]»D» perhaps, as in I. 88.
Line 88. n»D» Mr. Hayes (privately) suggests Arab, li, to ' scent ',
which would be suitable, but the participle (Pael) would be DSDE. The
n must be radical, so that we should have to assume a form HDD = DD.
NT1D or NT1D no doubt means 'lair' or something similar, but the word
is unknown. Epstein's comparisons for this word and HOOD are un-
convincing.
Line 89. At the ends of 11. 89-94 Sachau joins on another fragment.
It does not seem certain that it belongs here, nor how much is lost
between the two pieces. It makes these lines much longer than the rest.
After n Ungnad supplies N[n«1 STI^n], which is pointless. Noldeke 'of
the weak with the strong '. Seidel $[&}$ ^2] which is possible, but too
long if the following lines are rightly restored. The traces of the
next word (n3 . 10 ?) are quite uncertain. It might be ' for fear of. At
the end perhaps a word for ' burden '.
Line 90. Seidel ' he who neglects an ass and does not feed it ', taking
72D as in 1. 74. ni2 Baneth takes to mean ' burden '. Seidel and
Epstein think it =' shame' and cfnt. Ps. 153. NBfJl] Epstein
N^rT1 *r] ' whom he makes to bear a burden '. Baneth NC[JM Nl^nD'' *t]
and at the end [nW Dy n]?V N7T i. e. a double burden. All very un-
certain and obscure.
Line 91. |*n 'bowed to' (Epstein) is more probable with 7 than 33~l
(Ungnad). nncn["l j»]. Some trace of D. What the birds have to do
with it one cannot guess. Perhaps the fragment is not in place. The
proverb must end with the line, since 1. 92 begins a new sentence.
Line 92. riTSP Noldeke thinks a mistake for }*VSE>. As it stands it
can only be a noun ' an ornament '. nDTn similarly ' a pleasure '.
B>DB> the Babylonian god (Smend), the judge of right and wrong. [nn]ty
so Seidel, Noldeke, Grimme. Cf. 1. 93. *rupW. Seidel adduces a
root jli to ' vomit ' which is unknown to me (? t_ili ' drink to excess '),
and such a proceeding could hardly be pleasing even to Shamash.
236 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Obviously it must be connected with py 'gives it (to others) to drink ',
but the form is difficult. Strack eft. Mishna Aboda Z. ii, i p^n, cf.
Exod. 29. A root pu would be a regular parallel to py. riDDn V22
Ungnad says = Heb. B^? Dut does not say h°w ne would translate it.
It is B>33 ' he who keeps (his) wisdom to himself (as Noldeke), or
possibly even, as a contrast to rmN in 1. 94 'keeps it under control'
and does not let it go astray through drunkenness. The line may have
ended here, though something is wanted to balance the clause. Then
'31 yDt^l is the third thing pleasing — the sociable wine-drinker, the
modest wise man, and the discreet confidant. This form of numerical
maxim is common in Jewish ' wisdom \
Line 93. yot^l is apparently not in the same construction as \"lip'0'"i
1. 92, but is used loosely in the sense of ' and one who hears '. Tp*
must mean ' precious ', and this clause sums up the preceding proverb.
[Dip] a trace of D remains. Vi must begin the. converse statement,
' but he who'. nriB*. The n is not very probable. [VOpV] seems
likely, but it makes the line long.
Line 94. 'n |D [*13 .... l] Ungnad nmno "l.p — 1. After the
mark of division (doubtful) Baneth restores Dnnoan ND»y , . . p»B> |0"
' from heaven the nations (receive) their wisdom ; the gods give it '. For
the end Ungnad and Noldeke suggest \i tprb$ \0 nnoan. All very
obscure.
Plate 45.
Line 95 seems to refer to wisdom. If so, it is probably the continua-
tion of 1. 94. [rh \a]b[]lb T]y, so Baneth. j[n3]B>3 so Sachau,
Baneth (cf. 1. 94), &c.
Line 96 might be read NBV D[l^]n b$ (as Ungnad) ' curse not the day
till thou see (the night?) '. There is perhaps a trace of b. But can Dip
take an accusative? The usual word for 'curse' in these papyri is TO.
If tt[3]n as a jussive form is possible, and the blank space may be
disregarded, it forms a good connexion with 1. 97. N1JV adverbial, cf.
the forms vby, Nni3, Nnmp. ninn for ntnnn. It cannot be read
Dtnn as Noldeke and Seidel. n^[p ba] is required for 1. 97. The
rest of the line is blank, which is strange, if it reads straight on. The
scribe must have omitted something illegible, but ought to have left the
blank at the beginning instead of the end of the line.
Line 97. [»T] is most probable. The sentence cannot have begun thus,
with a feminine verb. [Py. So Epstein (?). Ungnad, Noldeke m?.
Baneth 7xb. Seidel nb. "JDD a nom. pendens 'but as to thy mouth,
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 237
take heed '. ["llnB1t3 is very difficult. It ought to mean ' ruining thee ',
but it is a strange word to use, and in the plural.
Line 98. [nyo]^ is Grimme's restoration. npin lit. 'make heavy a
(i. e. thy) heart upon (i. e. with regard to) what thou hearest '. rmbwn .
Noldeke and Grimme take this as passive. It may equally well be
active. [np]7 (Grimme) is not very satisfactory 'does not catch it
(again) '. Epstein proposes [33] b ' a man without heart (i. e. sense) '.
Line 99. '{.]». There is no obvious word. »3D 'count' would not
fill the space. The » might be N. nnN (or ■Tint), cf. perhaps Syr.
xmniN, 'secrets', parallel to 3~)N 'ambush' (so Montgomery). Baneth
would omit it. ps:n (Baneth) is certain. There is no suffix. After it
there is just room for l[ins!?] but the actual word is quite conjectural,
fmjn cf. 1. 126. nnbl2 a mistake for ner£», a Hebraism.
Line 100. H33n, in later Aramaic 'extinguish ', here, more generally,
' suppress '. Epstein and Noldeke HD3D (cf. Syr. NL3p), but this gives no
good sense. After nsan there is perhaps room for \"i. l[ini6] is
quite conjectural, but a repetition of the word restored in 1. 99 would be
natural in this style. The rest of the line is a separate proverb. pic
is ' smooth ' (Noldeke, Epstein). HaleVy ' sharp ' (eft. j^i.) and so
Baneth (eft. 403). [P]B3 V^D is Baneth's very probable conjecture.
Line 101. ">S^H 7»] is probably right. Seidel >aj[x Dip] is unlikely,
and too long. Qipn cf. 427 and the sense of 1. 103. HDV3 probably =
r\2)ip (Seidel, Stummer). Perles n["l]V3, but there are traces of Q.
Ti/T with 'anger', must mean 'swift' or 'sharp', but it is difficult to
account for such a meaning. Stummer suggests ' fearful ' and eft. jej.
Line 102. ,n[jl]n'1 seems the only possible form — Pael as in I. 96,
instead of Haphel as elsewhere — ' let him (the king) not show it (anger) '.
T"l[o]N is more probable than yiln ' to them that destroy thee ' (Epstein).
The rest of the line is blank.
Line 103. n[cnp] fits the space. Epstein n[bo . ,]. Tps i.e. if
any order is given. "]$> is added above the line. »f! fern, is attracted to
the gender of nc?N, but \-|(*ny) is correct as a masc. suffix. There is a
trace of the \ therefore not PTOJ? ^pace Noldeke). p3J?. The 3 is
badly formed, but can be nothing else. Cf. p2])b in 266-9-22, 427-8-13.
Epstein eft. Heb. p3n, Syr. pay, 'embrace', 'seize', grasp it and do it
i. e. do it promptly. Noldeke and Perles compare Targ. y3N (for Heb.
mno) ' hasten '. There is no doubt about the meaning in the papyri.
PB> }nn?[N]. The reading is certain. Epstein, Noldeke, Baneth take it
as pBOnn ' do not kindle (it) upon thee ', but this does not give a
satisfactory sense in connexion with ' and hide thy hands '. I cannot
238 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
help thinking that we have a scribal error here. 'Hiding the hands'
suggests that pt? is 'sackcloth'. It is clearly separated from jnn. If so,
jnn may be a mistake for jron, which might easily occur in this writing if
the original was not clear, and the meaning is ' do not put sackcloth upon
thee and hide thy hands ', i. e. do not go into mourning about it and
pretend you cannot do it. HDSni is certain, not mnm as Baneth to suit
the reading pBWin. At the end perhaps *a to connect 1. 104.
Line 104. "ion3(cf. 1. 47) rather than lorn. h^o] is suggested by
the preceding proverbs. They are grouped more or less according to
subject. Perles supplies Ni"i?K and eft. Job q2, 25"*, Is. io16, 45s.
Line 105. Nmiyr (Epstein, Noldeke) is certain, cf. ^^j- NmiO
must be an adjective, not a noun (as Wensinck). N[oyo]l is probable,
since the N is fairly certain, rather than n[^x]l or n[y?3]l as Noldeke.
Then pDn must be ' strong ' though it is not the word we should expect.
Noldeke, Perles 'lettuces' to suit n[^3S']l. [T^]o cf. 1. 100. Seidel's
NntJ>0 JO (eft. Prov. s3, 25 15, Ps. 5522) is too long.
Line 106. [nn3n^x] or a similar verb, is required.
Line 107. joms. Grimme Mike the merciful' i.e. God, but this
hardly suits the general tenor of the proverbs. Seidel takes the 3 as
otiose, and eft. 165. noy ba 1 as in 11. 154, 161, a very difficult
phrase. Noldeke and Seidel 'he with whom God is'. But the usual
word is niw or KVPK, not ^N (? 1. 173). Grimme takes it as = Hebr.
inoy^ -|B>X 'one who is his equal'. In 1. 161 noy^N is written as one
word, which would imply that 7N is the preposition, but the translation is
less suitable to that passage. The line ends here.
Line 108. K>0^3 may be either 'like Shamash ' or 'like the sun'.
[N]rVJ3. There is only room for one letter, and this restoration of
Noldeke's is probably right : law-abiding persons will uphold the dignity
of their king. Epstein proposes [^v]n HJ3 (Prov. 318), but there is not
room. Though there is a slight space before n, it must go with '22,
since there is no word of two letters beginning with n which would be
suitable. The rest of the line is blank.
Line 109. [n]D3. Perhaps [idJs fits the space better. [T *in]l is
almost certain. Baneth [in *t]l does not fit the traces of letters so well.
Perles [jNO]l would not fit at all. The line ends with i03.
Line no. Noldeke fills the lacuna with [n]!? ["ION* "ion cb]wb, but
there is hardly room, and we should moreover expect N"ion (cf. 1. 118)
for which the space is still less adequate, (x)ion is required by N*")OP
farther on, and perhaps we may read as printed. For this use of D,
cf. 26221, io13, and especially 1. 165 below (if so to be read) when
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 239
th seems to be fully equivalent to lOK^. B?B>. The last stroke is
simply part of D. It is not necessary to read the impossible v\bw (Sachau)
or )b& (Ungnad). The answer of the ass is unfortunately lost, since
clearly none of the other fragments join on to this — unless it were 1. 79,
where see note.
Plate 46.
Line nx. At the end there are traces of two letters, which do not fit
Stummer's rbxo or mao 'exile'. They may be na, which suggests
NDQT — not the word we should expect. Cf. Syriac no. 45.
Line 112. Cf. Syriac no. 46 and the passage of Ben Sira quoted
in Baba B. $8h ('ai paiDO b\> TINVD itb\). pD perhaps plural of "id
from vS-lD, cf. THB, 'crumbs'. Epstein eft. ns'S 'bran' as parallel
to paiD in the quotation from Ben Sira. ab) is repeated by mistake.
The first is partly erased. 2nin is simply the Hebrew 3tnn 'settler',
and there is no need to make it an abstract noun as Grimme and
Stummer. It is parallel to HiN 'traveller', 'visitor' in the Ben Sira
passage. b'bp ' light ' i. e. contemptible.
Line 113. pjn Ungnad 'friends', Noldeke 'shepherds', neither of
which gives much point. The combination with pu suggests that it
may be a Hebraism, and the phrase a mistake for pQ pa pjn P3
' whether they be bad or good '. This might have a meaning. The
rest of the line is blank.
Line 114 is very difficult. niT must govern W17O, and to multiply
words is a reproach, cf. 11. 96, 97 &c, and Eccles. iou. pDIDO
apparently agrees with vnta. Its connexion with N?y suggests that it is
for jboboB (so I. Low) cf. mints' for rbwbw, and Midr. Ber. R., § 91
"P»nn iT^D^D. Baneth ' they fly away '. n[^>]ya is suggested by the
traces remaining. Baneth n[n]j?». The meaning of the line is obscure.
Line 115. \r\ba is probable. |H7K D»m 'beloved of the gods'
(Noldeke, Epstein). "ICND^ is probable, though the N is badly made.
Line 116. The restoration may be regarded as certain. Perles
omits ,t.
Line 117. mK collective (Ungnad). Tlj/N tih] is quite certain
from the traces remaining. NSp^ is the only possible reading. Epstein
suggests the meaning ' flood ' and H2b = N^ — they call a flood ' lion '
because it is thrown out of the sea, and therefore is not in it. But this
is too far-fetched. Another suggestion is that NDp = sjlS ' boat ', which
makes the meaning no clearer. The root HDp means to float on the top
of the water or to congeal, so that the noun might mean ' scum '. N3^
seems to be = ii^lb. But the meaning is quite obscure.
240 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Line 118. rV"iy 'cold' (Grimme). NT3y is the emphatic form. At
the end n:y is required, but it makes the line rather long.
Line 119. *yDl 'my lord' is certain. Sachau and others ^DS, but
the form is impossible. Then »•> HD7 must be a complete phrase : ' why
(do you say that) to me' or ' what have I to do with you '. |np?n
is not for njnp?n (Sachau) but simply the energetic form governing *"p: .
b[KE*] (Epstein, Noldeke), not ^NKTI (2nd person) as there is no trace of
the tail of n. Hence *3 introduces a comment on the answer of the goat.
Line 120. N'OD 'kid' by an oversight for tttjy. K3~i is doubtful.
Sachau reads fcOT ' the bear ', followed by others. Noldeke prefers
to take it for N3NT (S3^1 = 2xr) ' the wolf. The sequel however seems
rather to require a human person here. [fcOljBN is probable here and
in the next line. For the lacuna Baneth suggests ' . . . lamb[s and said,
give me one of you]', and takes pncrx (1. 121) as 'I shall be content'.
This would be suitable, though it is difficult to see how the Aramaic
would express it. The trace of a letter at the end seems to belong
to an K, with a space before it — hence beginning a new word.
Line 121. pncx can only be 'I am (will be) silent'. Perles proposes
pnt? N*2t, but nothing seems to be lost at the beginning. N^[3]n is
certainly right (as Baneth), not ny[3]n as Ungnad, nor Njnn as Sachau.
[T">e>]n. The K is probable.
Line 122. n[e>]3K (Baneth) is no doubt right. Cf. Gen. 4144.
DnninnJOl is incorrect if Di~6j1 is singular, but it is a natural constructio ad
sensam. Noldeke assumes a mistake for DrrvJT. [PP [l1"1^]. There
are traces of } (or ~\) and of 3 (not ab as Epstein). Then we must either
supply a verb like 'we know' or suppose that O (I. 123) is a mistake
due to the line above it, or that 1. 123 is a repetition of the proverb
in another form.
Line 123. [xtw]K is a conjecture, but probable. There is not room
for much to complete the sentence, and 3D is likely to have been
repeated, as Vnnb in 1. 124.
Line 124. im? probably 'curse' here; elsewhere 'evil'.
Line 125 is very obscure. If God looks after men, a man may chop
wood in the dark without harm to himself. This is 5trange enough,
but why is he like a burglar? Jpy nhf». Grimme 'passes through
a wood '. Sachau ' causes trees to grow '. But to ' split ' wood is an
accepted meaning in Aramaic, and the other suggestions do not make
the passage more intelligible. After tJ^KS a T is deleted. "in*^.
Sachau says = "inD. Noldeke, Epstein 'breaks into'. Perles eft.
1 Sam. 59, where lini?? seems to mean ' burst out ', of tumours (but the
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 241
Jewish commentators connect it with ""iriD). He also compares Bab.
sutturu and Ezra 512, where "inD (^-s-^) is clearly 'destroy'. "Q (not
32) for rva as in 93. ["lojn^l is more probable perhaps than [njn^l.
Either the text is wrong, or some words are used in an unknown sense.
Plate 47 is in two columns, of which the first is fairly well preserved,
but the lines are very unequal in length, and the beginnings of all of
them are broken off.
Line 126. Noldeke restores "jriB>[p Tun i>K »"13]. There is not room
for n3. The natural word would be 1JJD, but in 1. 191 we have "]~n, as
in Hebrew, and in 1. 128, a root ending in J. This suggests m, a
collateral form of "]~n. As the same word was probably used here and
in 1. 128, I have restored J~nn. There is no trace of the p. It may
have been written, as in 1. 128, at a distance from the £>. For the
general sense cf. Pss. n2, 64* 5. nzb 'lest'. Cf. Ezra 422 (Ungnad).
rUD^ (Pael) as in Talmud ' goes ' (Noldeke, Pedes, Grimme). The verb
is singular with NN"6x plural, but perhaps this is only a mistake (so
Pedes) for xr6x, and not as in Hebrew. mnya cf. Exod. 184,
Deut. 3326, Ps. 1 46s.
Line 127. Probably four or three letters are lost at the beginning.
If it were Hebrew, we should supply DTiy? , but there is no obvious
word. "iVwH is usually taken for "i¥pn ' gather harvest ' (Grimme
'labour'). Cf. 1. 101 HDVD for nsvp. Ungnad suggests as an alter-
native juas ' to aim at '. For the end Strack eft. Deut. 611, 81012, 1 115.
Line 128 is parallel to 1. 126, as 1. 129 to 1. 127. nj[*n }nj.
Noldeke DDIT, but 3 is clear. Halevy and Pognon nj[j jn] for mJJ.
"J30 P*1)tb must go together 'one more righteous than thou'. NDn
probably ' sin ', with a play of words. Grimme ' arrow '. jr6x p
is difficult for ' as regards, in the sight of, God '. in (or in) must
be a slip for in. Grimme proposes to read NHH ' from thee is the arrow,
from God is the direction'. But after Til the papyrus is intact and
blank. We should expect ' the arrow will be turned back upon thee
by God '.
Line 129. For the beginning cf. 1. 127. son fj? (Epstein, Noldeke,
Halevy, Grimme) is right. Sachau and Ungnad {03"iDT, which Lidzbarski
savs means a 'quince', but he does not explain the construction. «]T
is imperative of fp ' borrow ' as in 1. 130.
Line 130. nn? (Epstein) is probable from the traces remaining. Cf.
1. 138. [}n c\]t< Noldeke, Epstein. I^B* not xbjff (as Strack). It
must be a plural abstract of N"6tS\ cf. ^jl^L, (Noldeke).
Line 131. The restorations are by Noldeke and Epstein. They add
25»» R
242 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
••T at the beginning, but I doubt if there is room. [D7C2>n] is probably
right, but there is no trace of it. *[a] N7EB Epstein ' payment of it
fills the house', which gives no sense, and is grammatically incorrect,
as the subject is feminine, but perhaps not impossible in these texts.
Noldeke better 'the filling of a house '. The point is not obvious. Can
it mean that the payment of a debt is liable to take everything you have
in your house? Baneth, mistake for fct/D. "'[s] cf. on 1. 125. There
is a trace of the 2. The line ends here.
Line 132. [73] is probable, as there is a trace of 7. There is room
for the restored words, but they are not very convincing. Baneth's B»N
\njy»tJTl7K 2~0» is less suitable, and does not include the 7. nnXJB' [*3].
There is a trace of 3. It looks like an alternative to what precedes, cf.
11. 122, 123. '}£> ' Hasslichkeit' i.e. 'ugliness'.
Line 133. jB"l[p] is certain, and there is just room for by. Baneth
eft. [pn]s by further on. \& . , (or BN , .) must be the predicate.
No satisfactory restoration has been proposed. }1Jtw[rv] (not pat?
as Sachau &c.) = Heb. U^ ' overtake '. The object is omitted as
probably in 1. 82. Or 'they shall overtake (i.e. find out) his lies'.
fp1*V from pp"i, either for J£W, or a mistake for JlpT1.
Line 134. Probably nothing before mao. n?*lp T'tt. Perhaps Me
should divide 71 7"lp. Baneth eft. Ekha R. 12(F) 7*lp Tan. On the
analogy of Heb. f]iy implying strength, it may mean his strength is
broken, he fails in his object. But why like a maiden ? ruoTI Epstein
thinks is from N£\ but it must be an adjective (Noldeke). In Ezek. 212
'n "pi may be ' the southern way '. Perhaps this is ' a southern maiden ',
though one would expect a gentilic form. V is probably right. Then
there is room for a verb of four letters. PQJN7. The 7 introduces the
object. We should expect '■her face'. The idea may be that the liar
wears a mask, but is unsuccessful in his devices, like one who curses
wrongfully. NJVI17 is a curse, not an oath (as Epstein).
Line 135. A mark at the beginning looks as if the scribe wrote *T
(or x) and erased it. }C1 is quite clear. Note that the sign -fc comes
at the end of a proverb, not at the beginning of a new one. The rest of
the line is blank.
Line 136. [DNDn7X] or something equivalent is required. y?B*
passive (Noldeke). The rest of the line is blank.
Line 137. [*2"in7N] is only conjectural. Cf. e.g. Deut. 81314, Ezek. 28s,
Ps. 6211. But 7*n[l vinn7N] would be possible. 7"n. There is an N
at the end, which is erased. NJ£7in as Heb. TW. Ungnad aptly
compares Sirach 82 (Heb.). The rest of the line is blank.
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 243
Line 138. [n] Noldeke and Epstein. DVW Noldeke, or for DOnn\
No doubt ' prides himself upon '. [TVpy K>]t3tr. There is perhaps
room for this. ' Let not Shamash rise upon him ' i. e. be favourable
to him. Noldeke and Epstein '•a [nB>]EC, but the space requires more
letters, and ' his sun ' is not very suitable. The suggestion [, , n]cc
is not very probable. n3T would then mean 'be illustrious', whicii
is possible in Syriac, but hardly at this date. The verb suggests B>»ty.
Line 139. *j» is probable from the traces. 'From me went forth',
i. e. was due to myself, so that I cannot demand satisfaction (p"l¥X)
from any one else. K-'^jn a Haphel (Seidel) with the meaning of Pael
' to feel ', ' spy out '. Ungnad takes the n as interrogative, which is
hardly possible. ">£K n[^] (Seidel) is possible, but not certain.
'What can I say' being parallel to the preceding clause. Ungnad's
Hjy fits neither the space nor the sense nor the remains of letters. It
would also require 1DN1. Grimme "V3N i"0N1 gives no sense. Some
word for ' evil ' would be suitable, taking "ion as 3rd person.
Line 140. ni[n] he, i.e. my son, was. Noldeke ni[n Tl^ JD] but
there is not room. DJOn "int? ' a malicious witness '. Ungnad eft.
Exod. 231 (where it is associated, as here, with false reports) and Ps. 3511.
Dl? [«]non. Noldeke Dyi, but there is scarcely room. nay an alterna-
tive form of P)y ' with whom shall I strive and weary myself? ', i. e. why
should I weary myself by striving? So Strack who eft. *ay in Targ.
Prov. 2 125. Seidel eft. lie iii, and Job q4. Ungnad misreads it as nyax.
Line 141. T[n] fits the space. Noldeke, 'my son, thy secrets'.
Seidel "pNDn. ?J3*7K[l] is required, but there is no trace of the 1. The
latter part of the line is blank.
Plate 47, col. ii. The lines were probably shorter than in col. i, but
only the beginnings remain. A stroke after 11. 142, 144, 145, 146 seems
to divide the proverbs. Few sentences can be completed satisfactorily.
Line 142. [M¥]J3. The V is probable. From nX3 'to quarrel'.
Line 143. [?]*&*. Noldeke rejects this, but the N is probable. It
might possibly be 3, and Perles suggests T¥3 (for TXp) but does not
explain it. [BBBTOK]. Cf. 1. 104, and Arab. no. 38.
Line 144. 1J"OD. From nJD 'weigh', Arab. eb)j ojyi- The traces
following seem only to fit ^>yi. [eiDin11] possibly.
Line 145. \'y\ £*tf] is only a conjecture.
Line 147. banon 'be crafty'. Seidel eft. Eccles. 716-17. "]yT 'be
extinguished ' (Ungnad) seems to be the only explanation. Or ? "JJTF
cf. I. 43. The n following is fairly certain. The masc. verb with a fern,
subject following is not impossible. Cf. 1. 153.
R 2
144 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Line 148. vnn. The n is badly formed and damaged. Sachau and
I'ngnad^-in or 'bin which give no sense. Cf. Arm. no. 8. *]l[y^T]
fairly certain. There are traces of 2 and y. Not "piy^ because jussive
' let them not swallow '. The end is restored from the Armenian.
Line 150. D"i suits the context, but a longer word is required.
Line 151. XB>[:k] n[lE>]tS> (Noldeke, Epstein) is probably right. For
the end cf. 11. 134, 135.
Line 152 was perhaps something like Prov. 1632.
Line 153. "]VQ1 fern, is apparently subject of Dn*V masc.
Line 154. The sentence must have begun in 1. 153. noy bn V as
in 1. 107, cf. 1. i6r.
Line 155. The beginning of the sentence, containing the object, must
have been in 1. 154. For the masc. verb cf. on 1. 153. bn must be
the preposition. The meaning is obscure.
Line 156. "ja^ for "ja.T, so Noldeke who takes b$ as ' God ' and KSax
as a participle. ' God overturns the mouth of the perverse '. If bn is
a preposition, it will be ' he shall turn retribution to the mouth . . .'
Line 157. 1D3X"1 'be blackened' i.e. darkened. Cf. u£. Masc. again
as in 1. 153. The restoration is probable, though merely conjectural.
Line 158. N^BO perhaps (as elsewhere 3 for p) = KB'&p 'truth'.
PrJietP seems to require Da in 1. 157, after eyes and ears. The rest
of the line is blank.
Plate 48, col. i. The lines are again very unequal in length.
Line 159. Probably nothing before B*K. *v[a£>]. Another sug-
gestion is TDTl, but the trace remaining favours a rather than D.
rmD = iTTO, with dagesh resolved, or rather with the double 1 not yet
represented by 1. Ungnad proposes DIID ' his dwelling ', which is less
suitable. For the form cf. aoooy , jpp£>, &c. n[riB>]p3. Noldeke objects
that this would require NTU'Dn, and proposes rVHpa, but the remnants
point to B> rather than 1 and the space would not be filled by H.
Reading nnc'pa we can only suppose that it is a mistake for ne>p3,
which is more suitable. , .-, , T\D *T is fairly certain. In 1. 128 JVJ
seemed to be used of the bow. Either that or 1J3 may be supplied here.
'JVK after the participle is unusual.
Line 160. 1Dy[»] if it is used in this Aramaic. Ungnad "lCnt?^] is
impossible. The long stroke before 13 is accidental, and the letter is y.
'Stand with ' = on the side of. n»l. Apodosis introduced by 1.
jitf as in Hebrew ? But ?y is difficult for ' by means of, ' trusting upon '.
HU or possibly [njaij, not [DnJaJ (as Baneth). ' His own strength '.
Line 161. The first letter visible is D (probably). Perhaps the word
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 24.3
before it is a participle ' he who guards himself against '. Epstein
assumes too much space at the beginning, and reads *^[33] JO ' secrets '.
Ungnad ^'[:k]. nnybtt rb T (Epstein's t6 is impossible), cf. 11. 107,
154. The fact that 7X is written as one word with n»y suggests that
it is the preposition. Also the addition of rb here makes the translation
'to whom God is with him' impossible. Hence noy?N — lnDJp, as
Grimme, is more probable. \-|JN[*T nJilT, Noldeke *JN["ltt]ni 'over-
throw him ' is impossible. The 1 is certain but n after it is doubtful.
The 1 is quite uncertain. Epstein proposes VUK3 , which he takes as
'in his strength'. A participle }XT is doubtful. In Ezra 725 pjKT is
Kethibh, pjw*i Kere.
Line 162 is very difficult and the restoration quite uncertain. NDEy
must be plural (so Noldeke). Elsewhere K^ocy. [nTis] (meaning ?)
appears best to fit the remaining traces. Dn2271 . There is a trace of
the D.
Line 163. [yT N?] gives a suitable meaning. [rb "in^] or some-
thing similar is required if the sentence ends with the line. Baneth
proposes Nmx2 continuing the sentence in I. 164.
Line 164. m?* (Epstein) is certain. [xmx]2 (Baneth) is merely
conjectural. "UN either ' roof (cf. 5*-) ' he will not be a co-tenant with
him ', or ' wages ', ' he will not employ him '. The epexegetical noun-
clause at the end is strange.
Line T65. N^JD]. There is not room for more at the beginning.
cb is probable. The small fragment ought to be slightly bent upwards.
There is not room for Dp[B>] (Noldeke, Epstein) as well as the N of
[N]j»"6. 2B HD Noldeke 'why'. Or perhaps 'what is the good
of?' [w]iV. Ungnad }[K\j:itP, but the f is very doubtful. NW is
a noun, 'the multitude of, as in 1. 106. [">b] as Sachau. Ungnad
V Dy from I. 166, but there is hardly room. "p2[jX2] seems to be
required, but there is hardly room.
Line 166. At the beginning there is space for about two letters —
not -ins*.
Line 167. X^N p**i¥ (Noldeke, Epstein) is certain. 'The righteous
among men'. Seidel arba P^V 'as for the righteous, God is his help',
mnya as in 1. 126. VWltM. Noldeke eft. Jv (to butt !) and Pal. Syr.
nDJ, Aphel 'to touch' (and so Strack), 'all who meet him are for his
help '. Grimme ' all who smite him perish ' (u*&). pin participle
of run ? We should expect the future. Perhaps it is to be read other-
wise, or the whole passage may be corrupt. The rest of the line
is blank.
246 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Line 168. [rV3] seems to be required by rpjnn. 7?nnri. Perles
eft. Jer. 2319 (with Targ.) ' is profaned ' i. e. destroyed. pTiBQl
parallel to m~l DVl or the antithesis of it. From v'nnt? it might mean
' in tranquillity ' but form ? pjnr Pael of JW ? ' they spread ' i. e. cast
down ? Noldeke eft. U-» ' fall '. nrn apparently ' plunder ' or ' prey '.
Line 169. The restoration is merely conjectural, and not very con-
vincing. The rest of the line seems to belong to the series of reproachful
sayings, at the end of the later versions.
Line 170. Beginning conjectural, but something of the kind is neces-
sary. 'Set my name in wantonness' i.e. disgraced it by wantonness.
The rest of the line is blank.
Line 171. prix* the energetic form (Noldeke). *nx cf. lo and
Syr. KTl. Perhaps 'approach' (Noldeke, Smend). tfi wmh the
Babylonian god of justice. It is written in&> BS}6 by an accident.
Line 172. The fragment containing '•T is upside down in the facsimile.
After ~p the line is blank.
Plate 48, col. ii. The left-hand side of the column is lost, and the
lower half is too fragmentary for restoration. There is no evidence of
the length of the lines, unless the restoration of 1. 189 is right.
Line 1 73. 7X perhaps ' God ' though it is joined to p**Wf3 . PHV3 ' as
a righteous man', 2 circumstantiae. Noldeke 'by means of a righteous
man', i.e. Nabusumiskun. The line may have ended 'why hast thou
plotted against me?' It would then belong to the second series of sayings.
Line 174. ''ittw a mistake (Sachau) for ,|NJB\ In 1. 206 it must be a
different word. The line may have ended ' for God will avenge me'.
Line 175. "1DD 'a secret place' (cf. Ps. 911) hence 'abode', 'home'.
[m]nD1. Baneth eft. Deut. 3a10-11.
Line 176 goes with 1. 175, as the side-stroke indicates, mpini, so
Noldeke, who reads ^KJt?, as Hak4vy. Baneth takes it as ' hardened [thy
heart] ', and *pcm as 'piety'.
Line 177. am perhaps 'pity', cf. Samaritan Aramaic TTIN, or
' admonish ' as Syriac (Aphel).
Line 178. . . . D Low proposes [pa]D 'is enough'.
Lines 179-183. No word is certain.
Line 184. Meaning obscure. Apparently related to 1. 186.
Line 186. n . 2. Sachau's TV22 is improbable. It is more like Din.
Noldeke translates ' into a house of bronze ', an unlikely expression.
Line 187. WQ) is most likely from the traces remaining. jnn
(or yin) may be 2nd or 3rd person fern. nniS rather than X,T
(Ungnad).
THE WORDS OF AHIKAR 247
Line 188. Cf. Prov. 277.
Line 189. Cf. Prov. 3iG-7.
Plate 49. Four fragments. No line is complete.
Line 191. "jTT. In 11. 126-8 iYl appears to be used. There is
a stroke after this line (cf. above, 11. 173-188). As this always starts from
the first letter, there was nothing before "in.
Line 192. Hal^vy completes 'and if you keep it, your master may
leave ', &c, and so Noldeke. Perhaps rather ' keep it with care, so that
afterwards he may be willing to leave '; cf. 1. 103.
Line 193. p3K>D^. The £ is badly formed, but can be nothing else.
According to Sachau's arrangement the end of this line is the beginning
of the second fragment.
Line 194. Cf. Syr. nos. 31, 32, Prov. 2 57.
Line 196. ms cf. 1. 80.
Line 197. The small fragment c may belong here. HIVD is fairly
certain.
Line 198. £>p . . . Baneth restores Vft[w CHp tF»K p"W vb~\. If the
small fragment belongs here, the line might be ' he who brings an accusa-
tion against his master, shall be entrapped (some part of £'p\ a Hebraism)
in his law-suit . . .'
Line 199. fWn N3N. Baneth suggests K3N1 and eft. Syr. no. 36.
Line 201. Seidel begins with *p 'go', but the first letter seems to
have a tail, therefore not b. The line must have been something like
1. 192.
Line 203. xn30 if = "13», it ought to be (n)1D:d (Ungnad). pro
probably from jn3 ' test '.
Line 204. The restorations are by Seidel and Baneth. The proposals
for the beginning are not convincing. rmj& more probably than
rrnyb (as in 1. 126).
Line 205. *[VF ~\b~] Seidel. The root i>3D here and in 1. 204
probably means ' support (with food, &c.) '. If so, "]nD3 is probably not
'fodder' (Ungnad) «???> but 'cushion' (i.e. saddle) Heb. f1D3.
"P33"l ' thy riding upon me '. nrnx is clear. Baneth ' I will not accept
thy saddle '. But the phrase is so strange that there must be some mistake.
Line 206. 'iNtf. Perles eft. Bab. senu 'shoe' and so Noldeke and
Halevy. If so, \V2 pn] is no doubt right.
Plate 50. One large and seven small fragments. Little can be read
on the facsimile. The arrangement adopted here is uncertain, as the
text is too much broken to give a sense.
248 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Line 208 seems to mean ' do not set a man to a task for which he is
unsuited '. rnyns is not very probable.
Line 209. Nl^n (Baneth) is fairly certain. Supply before it perhaps
'he who makes '. , . . U\. Baneth ptJl, but a participle is wanted.
Line 210. First half very uncertain, and the sense obscure.
Line 211. 0*11 (or mi). Sachau Dli which Seidel takes as ' piece '.
Line 2 1 6. b'ly ' a child ' ? cnn ' a dumb person ', infant ?
Line 217. pni3 if right, may = Heb. D'Tin "13, as Sachau.
Line 2 1 8. Cf. perhaps 1. 84, but the reading is very uncertain. n7i[y]n .
Seidel rbv2 ' with his own money '.
Line 219. ma perhaps as restored in Mesha 1. 16 ' maid'. At the end
possibly [rtanjna .
Line 222. Epstein nC'S nptM..
The Behistun Inscription.
This great trilingual inscription is famous as having formed the basis
of the decipherment1 of cuneiform writing. If any confirmation of that
decipherment were still required, ft would be supplied by the Aramaic
version found in these papyri — the earliest specimen we possess (other than
cuneiform) of a Semitic translation of any text. The inscription itself
was carved by order of Darius the son of Hystaspes on the face of an
almost inaccessible rock on the road from Babylon to Ecbatana
(Hamadan), in the early part of his reign, probably not later than
510 b.c, to commemorate the means by which he consolidated his
power.2 Such a record however, splendid as it was, could not by itself
spread the fame of his exploits, for, though travellers by the road were
no doubt numerous, the inscription was too far off to be read by them.
Darius therefore caused copies and translations to be made and sent to
various parts of his dominions. To these an allusion seems to be made
at the end of the inscription, in a passage which is best preserved, but
difficult to understand 3 in the Susian or Ekmite version.4 « By the grace
of Auramazda I made inscriptions in another manner (?) . . . which had
1 See A. J. Booth, The Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform
Inscr. (1902) for a full account, and R. W. Rogers, Hist, of Babylonia and Assyria
(1915), p. 83, &c.
2 King and Thompson, The Sculptures and Inscription of Darius . . . (London,
1907).
3 Only what is certain is given here. It is unnecessary to discuss it.
4 There are traces of it also in the Persian. See King and Thompson.
THE BEHISTUN INSCRIPTION 249
not been done before . . . and it was written . . . and I sent those inscrip-
tions into all lands and the people [read them]'. A fragment of one
such copy, in cuneiform Babylonian on stone, was found recently at
Babylon,1 and fragments of an Aramaic version are contained in these
papyri — a material more suitable for sending 'into all lands'. The
papyri seem to represent at least two copies of the version. So important
a piece of work was no doubt done officially by the great king's own
scribes,2 and sent out to the chief men of the provinces, who would
preserve the record and make it known by public reading to their
people or by publishing copies of it.
Although the language of Darius was Persian, it is probable that for
state purposes Babylonian continued to be used in the capital, and that
the Babylonian part of the Behistun inscription is to be regarded as the
official text. It alone gives the number of killed and of prisoners taken —
an important part of the record. For international purposes Aramaic
was used, and it is natural that the official Aramaic version should follow
the official Babylonian text. JSachau (p. 185) considers that the corre-
spondence between the two is very close and literal, while Ed. Meyer 3
regards the Aramaic as a free translation. Both are partly right. The
Aramaic gives the numbers of killed and prisoners, and otherwise where
it corresponds to the Babylonian it is generally very close — the same
words and phrases being regularly rendered in the same way, sometimes
without regard to differences of idiom, as is the manner of ancient trans-
lators. But the papyri are too much broken to warrant our saying that
this is always the case. Indeed in some of the lacunae it does not seem
possible to restore any Aramaic which will translate the Babylonian
exactly. Moreover the fragment (p. 266, plate 56, 4) of a second copy
does not entirely agree with the first. The same seems to be true of
the fragment of a Babylonian copy found at Babylon (see above), for
Weissbach notes that there is not always room for the standing phrases
' Auramazda helped me : under the protection of A.', &c. He suggests
that the mention of Auramazda was purposely omitted as unacceptable to
Babylonians, and that where the words ina silk' ( = I"6l33) occur, they may
have been followed by the name of a Babylonian divinity (Nabu or
Marduk) or by ildni rabiile. It seems then that the copies distributed
either were intentionally adapted to their readers, or that they uninten-
tionally diverged from the original. It is curious that the Babylonian
1 See Verbffentlichungen d. Dentschen Orient-Gesellschaft iv. p. 24 + .
2 See introduction to Ahikar above, p. 205.
3 Papyrmfund, p. lor.
250 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
fragment corresponds to parts of the Aramaic version where the original
on the rock is defaced — a fact which may interest any one who still
doubts the genuineness of these papyri.
The Aramaic version was no doubt made soon after the great inscrip-
tion was engraved. The present fragments, however, represent a later
copy. This is conclusively shown by the blank spaces which occur at
irregular intervals and which indicate omissions. Thus e. g. between
11. 22 and 23, the other copy (of which pi. 56, 4 is a fragment) originally
contained the omitted passage. The official Aramaic copy, sent out by
Darius say about 510 b. c. must therefore have become worn out in the
course of years, but these Jews of Elephantine, being a literary people,
thought it worth while to re-copy the document and to preserve it as an
historical record. On the whole they did the work carefully, but the
exemplar was already illegible in parts, and this may account for some
of the divergences from the Babylonian text. They made some mistakes
too, and where the writing was hopelessly obliterated, they did not attempt
to restore it, but left a blank space to be filled up when the Babylonian
original, after lying dead for 2,000 years, was brought to life again. This
is corroborated by the character of the writing, which is the same as that
of most of the other documents in this collection and would naturally be
dated about 420 b. c. — about 80 or 90 years after the document originally
sent by Darius.
The papyri are unfortunately very much broken. Not a single line
is complete, and one piece (11. 50-63) is so much defaced as to be
almost illegible, at least on the facsimile. Thanks to the frequent use of
set phrases and to the close relation of the two languages, it is often
possible to restore the Aramaic with certainty, especially where it is
evidently following the Babylonian text. But owing to the divergences
mentioned above, and also to the fact that the Babylonian text is itself
sometimes defective, restoration is not always possible. (In 11. 50-63
I have done little more than copy down Ungnad's readings.) These
defects are less regrettable here than in the Ahikar text, since for
practical purposes we already possess the Babylonian text, supplemented
by the Susian (or Elamite) and Persian versions, and no conjectural
emendation could supply us with a new historical fact. The interest of
the Aramaic, fragmentary though it is, consists in its being an early
translation, in the evidence it gives of the relation of Babylon to the
provinces, and in its confirmation of the decipherment of cuneiform.
251
THE BEHISTUN INSCRIPTION
Col. i. Sachau, plate 52.
»rnna ////// *» [. .] nnts pm /////// ^ -^ ///// //[/ ona &ap 1
niX ljBOantt ktid x^n
sma not? "»an[a] xanp nay nn[x] anp nayo^> [bhti *? npnyi? 2
t nhoa ■ojiyq nnnvM tm«a
&op anp nay tk^ ////////-> a xnno^> i^op ^[n x^n WYins 3
/// ///] -3 3 «£// /// DH3
nay nnx anp nayo^> anm »t [n]pny^ fax u?:an[x xnno N&n 4
nots>] una anp
x'lnjnoi? 'fyt x^n ["ironJvnN v n^oa *:nyo nro[nnx onnxa xnna 5
pd? iy 1 111 mi £o[p]
// *» [. . . . i]nnx pm //-»■*[•*]■* ♦* l//7 Dn[q &ep anp nay 6
onnxa ^ n]nao Tay x[i? Dyn<30 mi nnx
[nmV|B> [onnxi?] *did n^y no[tj>] DOim ["ion P rc&o pinm 7
xb n] xnno i» x[^]n bra hidk
v^[:]anx x[n]no nooob mnx^ bra doihi nnx [ion bop ^ iyoe> 8
nayob Doi]m [n npnyb i]bra
\i/i->-% $\\ ona bop [xanp nay nnx anp 9
na[y] anp nayob mom n npnyb ib[?]x lswanx xn[no x*bn *nnna 10
xanp n]ay Ytfb [-^a] xanp
[// /]// lll->-%i^/l lit tfri nnx pn[i] // /// [ ^ "5 *ib// ona lbop 1 1
onnxa] *b nna[o nay xb] oyn:o D[oi]m nnx
no[b] nooob [n]obrx n[ps3] b[aa jo nra nnx nox }a xabo ennrn 12
n]y it m[na *]noa no^ nn:aa
nronmx *t n[b]oa (/]ny[D nr]o[nnx [xanp pay anp nayob nnx xb'n 13
// lll-^p. nbo[p nnns] n xbm
^/lllllll^ l nnnx [pm]///// [. . . ona nbop xanp pay (?) iwrvb 14
It mna nnx . . ,]->
xb]*n [nnbs? nnx 15
252 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Col. ii. Sachau, plate 54, col. 1.
nnay lnnaa n rut mn b [xno nnx nox p xa^o tsnnm 16
nay on^y n^o uno not? [mo xno ion p xata annnn 17
i>o[p] ^>rx nnox "[nnna n] xnn[a net? bhti nn^ nnx not? xnna 18
•onyD nroninx x^mjo Dy xa[np nay tinn nnx smo «^r6 19
mp nay ^[oai> ///]^a n^x [xmob l^op nroninx n n^oa 20
/// /// /// 0/// /// [nnx pm /// ^ -3 *> // e£// /// -» "^ ^ Dna tap 2 1
-ion] Dnaa an1' >Dna noa> fn[m nn ex nox p xa^o nnnn 22
x]n[n]a *? -p^>xa x-naa n nDoa [x^na x^n nnx sna n ma »ha m« 23
n-yr Dnaa n x^n njx nnx D[naa mn n^o in i^tx nny mo 24
-Dna not? nninnx nnta n[m »oy n ho n x^m mo vb n 25
nn]innx nnx [n]rx *oy [*]noi Dna [n x^n nnx nn^p Dintrxna 26
n[n]a ruN [n]ox n [it] n[nm nnx b?x Dnsa nop xnn^> x^n ny 27
D[y] n[nx]
nrom]nx ■»? ntaa ^nyo nroninx [xanp nay anp nayob vb-n 28
Dna no[p] xanp nay [tx^ //->a nnn n xb'rb tap ^ n x^n 29
. . ill** ill
D]np pdid uan [xnj^yr x^n [Dy n,? nnn hx nnx . . . nnx pm 30
nayo^> nninnx [n] npny^ nn[x x^n Dy nnx xnna nop xnvt^ab 31
?np]n n*va n[nn n x]^n [^ *? x^n i?op xanp inay anp 32
Plate 563. n]oP .... 18* Sachau, p. 203, no. 7.
]n nnx x 19* xn]:n[o i9t
*]!> n x^n 20* /// 2ot
]^*»// Pji?///// 21* ej[> 2it
]njx n hjt ni[n 21a*
no]p nnn [n]ox 22*
n] nnx p[n]a n n[na 23*
i?]o VI 1^TX \mi?[y 24*
]no *? x^m in[no 25*
]w\ nnta d[ 26*
]noK> [x]nn[^] vb[ 27*
F 3[n]p 28*
THE BEHISTUN INSCRIPTION 253
Col. iii. Sachau, plate 54, col. 2.
. . . nnx pm . . . D]na nap tan? nay 33
nnx n>:x p Nai»o enrim nnx ron n»]y n xnm nnx nnm 34
D-iaa n»e> (?)xnmna nabs ron n»y n xn]m k^bp . . "■» no^ 35
may] Dnaa #um 'T rut //-^-q 36
Tinnn^ x^*n ma n:x ncx n "it mi*]i nrcx p xata wn 37
xnna *ona nay noB> um n npny^ D]vnmra in trw nta 38
wot? xa^o enmnni? n x^nS nawf i^ik d^> »nmina n 39
xanp nay anp nay^ nrx x:m n npny^] mvn *r x^n itap 40
ibtap Nmoi» linap »^t x^n wwin "t ni>oa] unyD wtom 41
nau^ ///->2 , , . nnt« pm . .]-> -3-3 -3 +»////[/ e|]i> \/[//] ona 4?
n N^n^ nop nT x^n wivw »» ntaa •onyjD nromnx anp inay 43
br« nnx . , . nnx pm . . .]/// ana nop xmo 44
.nnx pdid *aan xmyr xVn ay nnny] mn an »i T xna: 45
npnyi? x^n oy twi*i ^>rx nnx wmn n:n]oa xn[na] n[&>]nx pn[y 46
xn^Dp nna: ^tap mn ney n xnm nnnx xa]np n[ay anp nayci? 47
mn n xna nnx nox p xata bwti . . . nnxi] nop n[*n n #m 48
. . . nsx p xata unnm n]nay *nn[nna n n:r 49
******
*
Plate 56s. ]bni[ 46
]p nns:[ 47*
]no nnx[ 48*
blank
Col. iv, Sachau, plate 55, col. 1.
ana* n b^n ronn nnx *? ita n[jx nnx p xata cimnn 50
ana* n . . . y titn jx*:k> pna jd[ 51
-jnai>n [?iw] ™s* "TO* ,J T« ^n[ 52
(?)nrox* nnna n ync> nox* n:[x 53
nn^np sjk nn it nay* aaD5 n na[ 54
(?) pb» ^y inani mnn tr:D'x n,aio[ 55
* »[r] ... 3 xnana , . . n xnn[ 56
. . . faSrin x^ . . . n:[r 57
psnn |]ro panx* yw\ tu[v 58
• • •
2-A ARAMAIC PAPYRI
[ntap] run [i]y wi »»y |Dp *r ^[na: nbx noK p tobo vvrm 59
invjns [^oy] WW [nsri ma nj« ton n Knao it 60
(?)Wlo na [nnau ^d]=id [mm ->a nbe> ruisiyn 61
(?)ma wo .... d ^[na '•DID 62
.•'-.. bao m 63
Plate 56s. '•Jd-iD 62*
5. 63*
ia 64
Transcription of the corresponding parts of Bab. [i. e. the Babylonian
text of the Behistun inscription], taken from King and Thompson,
The Sculptures and Inscription of Darius . . .p. 177. The numbers in
parentheses (50, &c.) indicate the lines of the cuneiform text. These
have been divided so as to show their correspondence to the lines of
the Aramaic version, indicated in the margin. Passages in italics,
bracketed, are as supplied by the editors from the other versions. The
fragment mentioned above (p. 249) begins in 1. 10.
1. (50) arki nikrutu iphurunimma ittalku'
2. ana tarsi Dadarsu ana episu tahaza arki itepsu' saltum (51) [ina
alu Tigra sumsu ina Urastu Urimizda issi dannu ina silli sa Urimizda
uku attua iddnku ana nikrutu
3. agasunu iimu 18 (KAM)sa Aim ilepu~\su said idduku' ina libbisunu
546 u baltutu
3 a. ussabbitunu 520 arki ina Sanitum
4. harrani nikrutu (52) [iphurunimma ittalku' ana tarsi Dadarsu ana
episu tahaza arki itepsu saltum ina Uyama sumsu ina Urastu
5. Urimizda issi dannu] ina siili sa Urimizda uku attua ana nikrulu
idduku umu 9 (KAM) sa Simanu
6. itepsu saltu (53) [ arki Dadarsu amalu la epus idaggalu
paniya
6 a. adi muhhi sa anaku allaku ana Jl/addj
7. Dariyamus sarru kiam ikabbi Umissi sumsu galla Parsa ana
Urastu (54) \_altapar umma emuku nikrulu sa la ish'mmu'inni dUkulunulu
arki
8. Umissi iltalak ana Urastu ana] kasadu nikrutu iphurunimma ittalku'
ana tarsi Umissu ana epes tahaza
9. arki itepsu saltu (55) [ina Izala ina Assur Urimizda issi dannu
THE BEHISTUN INSCRIPTION 255
ina silli sa Urimizda uku attua ana nikrutu idduku iimn ij {KA M) sa
Tebelu itephi sal]\\ idduku ina libbiSunu 2024
10. ina sanili harrani nikrutu iphurunimma illiku' ana tarsi Umissi
ana epis tahaza (56) [arki itepsu saltu ina Uliydri ina Urastu Urimizda
issi dannu ina silli la Urimizda uku attua] ana nikrutu idduku umu
30 (KAM) sa Airu itepsu saltum
11. idduku ina libbisunu 2045 u baltutu ussabbitu 1558 (57) [arki
Umissi amatu la epul idaggalu paniya
1 1 a. adi muhhi sa anaku ana Madd alliki
1 2. Dariyamus sarru kidm ikabbi arki anaku ultu Bdbilu usam]m&
attalak ana Mada ana kasadi ana Mada ina Kundur sumsu ina Mada
(58) [ina libbi ana muhhiya Parumartis agahi sa ikabbu umma anaku
Ur Madd iiti
13. uku ittalak ana episu tahaza arki nitepuvs saltu] Uramizda issi
dannu ina silli sa Uramizda uku sa Parumartis (59) [adduku umu 2j
14. la ... . nitepus saltu arki Parumartis agasu
15. illi uku] isi eliya sa sise ihlikma illikma ina Raga' sumsu ina
Mada arki anaku uku (60) [allapar ana muhhilunu Parumartis1 agasu
* * * *
16. (68) [Dariyamus sarru kidm ikabbi arki mdtu ana attua tatur agd
sa anaku ina Partii epusu]
17. Dariyamus Sarru kiam ikabbi matu Margu' sumsu takkirannima
18. isten amelu Parada' sumsu (69) [Margiand ina kakkadisunu arki
Dadarsu htmsu galld Parsd pahdlu sa Bahtar allapar umma aliktna
dtlku
19. ana uku nikrutu sa la isimmu]'inni arki Dadarsu ittalak itti uku
itepsu saltum itti Marguma (70) [Uramazda issi dannu
20. ina silli sa Uramazda uku attua idduku ana nikrutu agasunu umu
2} sa Kislimu itepsu saltum]
21. idduku ina libbisunu 55243 u baltutu ussabbit 6572
21 a. Dariyamus sarru (71) [kidm ikabbi arki mdtu ana attua tatur agd
sa anaku ina Bahtar epusu
22. Dariyamus sarru kidm ikabbi isten amelu Umizdatu sumsu ma
Tar]ma.' ina Iutiya sumsu ina Parsu asib Su itbamma ina Parsu ikabbi
ana uku (72) [umma
23 anaku Barziya marusu sa Kuras arki uku sa Parsu mala ina
alluka' sa Iutiya
24. illekru' lapaniya ana muhhisu illalku' hi ana sarru] ina Parsu
[ittur] DariyamuS sarru kiam ikabbi arki anaku uku sa Parsumi isi
25. (73) [ Arlamarziya sumsu galld Parsd
256 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
26. ina kakkadihinu allapar~\ uku §a Parsu ittiya ittalku' ana Mada
arki Artamarziya
27. itti uku (74) [ana Parsu ittalak ana Parsu ana kasadu ina Rakha
sums' u ina Parsu Umizdatu agasu sa ikabbu umma anaku Barziya itti
28. uku ittalak ana tarsi] Artamarzi ana epi§ tahaza itepsu saltum
Uramazda issi dannu ina silli §a Uramazda
2 9> (75) [uku attila idduku ana uku sa Umizdati umu 12 (KAM) sa
Airu itepsu saltum]
30. arki Umizdatum agasu itti uku isi eliya §a sise ihlikma
31. ana (76) [Pisi'humadu illik ultu libbi sil itti uku ittalak ana tarsi
Artamarziya ana epis
32. tahaza ina Parga sadu sumsu itepsu sallum~\ Uramazda issi dannu
ina silli sa Uramazda uku attua idduku ana uku §a Umizdati (77) [umu
5 {RAM) la ...
33. itepsu saltum
34. Umizdatu agasu u mdr-bdnilli sa iltisu subbutu~\ Dariyamus sarru
kiam ikabbi arki anaku
35. Umizdatu agasQ u mar-banuti sa ittisu gabbi ina zakipi (78) [ina
Uma . . . sumsu ina Parsu altakan
36. Dariyamus sarru kidm ikabbi ago, so] anaku ina Parsu epuSu
37. Dariyamus sarru kiam ikabbi Umizdatu agasu sa ikbu (79) [umma
anaku Barziya uku ana Aruhatti
38. {spur isten amelu ina kakkadisunu iltapar ana tarsi Umimana'
sumsu galld] Parsa pahatu
39. sa Aruhatti umma alkama Umimana' duku' u ana (80) [uku sa
ana Dariyamus sarru isimmii
40. arki uku sa Umizdatum ispuru illiku' ana tarsi Umimana' ana epis
tahaza ina Kdpisaka]nz itepsu saltu
41. Uramazda issi dannu ina silli Sa Uramazda uku (81) [attua idduku
ana uku nikrutu
42. umu i) (KAM) sa Tebetu
43. itepsu saltum arki ina sa?iitum harrdni Jiikrutu iphurunimma ittalku'
ana tarsi Umimana ana epis tahaza ina Gandutava\ itti [?iikrtltu\ itepsu
saltum Uramizda issi dannu ina silli sa Uramazda (82) [uku attila idduku
ana uku
44. nikrutu umu 7 {KAJ\P) sa Addaru itepsu saltum ] arki
45. amelu agasu sa ina eli uku rabu sa Umizdatum ispuru itti uku
isi eliya (83) [sa sise ihlikma
46. ana Arsada sumsu ina Aruhatti illik arki Uvwnana' itti uku
] sasu ina libbi
THE BKHISTUN INSCRIPTION 257
47. issabatsu idduksu u mar-banuli sa ittisu idduk naphar diku
48. u baltu sa uku (84) [ Dariyamus s"arru kidm ikabbi arki
main ana attiia talur
49. agd sa anaku] ina Aruhatti epusu Dariyamus sarru kiam ikabbi
adi muhhi sa anaku ina Parsu u Mada (85) \aturu . . .
* * *
50. (105) .... [Dariya]m\i$ [sarru] kiam ikabbi mannu atta §arru
sa bela arkiya amelu sa uparrasu
51. u parkani (106) la ta[ Dariyamus sarru kidm ikabbi
52. . . .] kt naru suatu tammari u salmanu agannutu
53-57-
58. (107) . . . ka u na . . ka lusam'id umeka [/#r]rik Uramazda
lurabbis (108) if mi\mma] sa . . . . nutum nika la tanakkQ
Uramazda lirur (109) u zeru]ka . . .
59. Dariyamus sarru kidm ikabbi agannutu] sabe ittiya
ituru' adi muhhi sa anaku ana Gumati agasu
60. (no) Magusu d\duku sa ikabbu umma anaku Barziya ....
61 ]su sumsu apilsu sa Misparu' Parsa Umittana* sumsu apilsu
sa Suhra' Parsa (111) Gubaru' sumsu apilsu sa Mard[;/ . . . sumsu
62. Parsa sumsu apilsu sa Parsa] Magabudisu
sumsu apilsu sa Za'tu'a Parsa Ardimanis sumsu apilsu sa Umahku
63. (112) Parsa sabe agannutu lu madu suddid.
{end of Bab.)
Col. i.
1 They killed of them 827 and look alive ... 06. A second time the
rebels gathered together. They went 2 to meet Dadarshish to join battle.
Then tliey joined battle at the fortress called Tigra, in Armenia.
Auramazda helped me ; by the protection of 3 Auramazda my army slew
the rebels. On the 18th of Iyvar they joined battle. They slew of
them 5046.
4 Again the rebels gathered together. They went to meet Dadarshish
to join battle. Then they joined battle at Huyav as it is called, 5 the
fortress in Armenia. ^4«rcmazda helped me; by the protection of
Auramazda my army slew the rebels. On the 9th of Swan 6 they joined
battle. They killed of them 472 and took alive ...02. Then Dadarshish
did noting (further), \\2atv1g for me in Armenia.
7 Thus says Darius the king, One Vaumisa by name, my servant, a
Persian, to Armenia I sent. I said, 'Go, that ar;;/y, the rebels who do
not 8 obey me, slay them' Then Vaumisa went to Armenia. On (his)
arriving (there) the rebels gathered together. They went to meet Vaumisa
2699 S
2yS ARAMAIC PAPYRI
to join '■' battle. Then they joined batik1. He killed of them 2034.
10 A second time the rebels gathered together. They went to meet
Vaumisa to join battle. They joined battle. On the joth of Iyyar they
joined battle. u They killed of them 2045 and \odk alive 1578. Then
V&umJsa did nothing, waiting for me in Armenia.
12 Thus says Darius the king, Then I went out from Babylon and went
to Media. On arriving in Media at a (city) named Kundur in Media
that Phraovles with 13 the army came to join battle. We joined battle.
Auramazda folped me, by the protection of Auramazda I slew the army
of Phraor/es. On the 25 th 14 of ' Jlfarheshwan(?) we joined battle, /hilled
of them ...5 and alive 1 took 1080 10. Then that Phraortes 1:' . . . Then
I sent the army . . .
Col. ii.
1G Thus says Darius the king, Then the country was mine. This is what
I did in Parthia. n Thus says Darius the king. The country called
Margiana rebelled. As king over them they made 18 one Frada by name.
Then I sent {the man) named Dadarshish, governor of Bactria. I said,
' Go, kill 19 the army, the rebels' Then Dadarshish joined batile with the
Marxians. Auramazda helped me. 20 By the protection of Auramazda
they killed those rebels. On the 23rd of Chislew they joined battle.
21 They killed of them 55243, and took alive 6972.
22 Thus says king Darius, A certain man, Vayazdaia. by name, a Persian,
dwelt in Persia. He said, 23 T am Sf/ierdis, the son of Cyrus. Then the
Persian army, as many as (?) were in the houses in the neighbourhood (?)
of the fortress, 24 rebelled. They went over to him. He became king in
Persia. Then I sent the army, which was small, in Persia, 25 which
had not rebelled, and the army of Media which was ivith nie. Artavarzi
by name, a Persian, 26 / sent at the head of them. Then the army of
Persia and Media went with me. Then Artavars? 2~ with the army went
to the place called Rakha in Persia. Then that Vayazdaia, who said,
I am Smerdis, came (?) with 2S the army to join battle. They joined battle.
Auramazda helped me, by the protection of Auramazda 29 my army
killed the army of Vayazdaia. On the 12th of Iyyar they joined battle.
They killed of them 303... 30 and took alive . . . Then that Vayazdata
zvent with a small force of cavalry before :!1 the fortress called Paishiyau-
vada. Then, with his army, he came to meet Artavarzi to join 32 battle.
They joined battle. My army killed the army of Vayazdaia. In the
month Tishri(?)
Col. iii.
33 they joined battle. They killed of ihem . . . and look alive . . . M they
took Vayazdata, and the nobles who were with him they {also) took.
Thus says king Darius, Then 35 I put 10... to death, and the nobles who
were with him I crucified at a place called Uvadaicaya in Persia 36 52 (of
them). This is what I did in Persia.
37 Thus says king Darius, That Xayazdata, zvho said, I am Smerdis,
had sent an army to Arachosia 38 and a certain man at the head oi
THE BEHISTUN INSCRIPTION 259
them to meet my servant named Vivaria, a Persian, the governor 30 of
Arachosia, saying, Go to Vivana, and the army which obeys king Darius
40 kill (them). The army of Vayazdata zvent to meet Vivana to join battle.
They joined battle. 41 Auramazda helped me. By the protection of
Auramazda my army killed the rebels. They killed 42 of them 4570...
and took alive . . . On the ijih of Tebeth 43 they joined battle. Auramazda
helped me. By the protection 0/ Auramazda my army killed the army 0/
44 the rebels. They killed of them 3... and took alive Then
jled 45 that man who was in command over them with a small force of
cavalry and went 46 towards (?) Arshada the fortress in the province
of Arachosia. Then Vivana went with the army to meet him 47 to join
battle. He joined, battle. He took him, and killed the nobles ivho were
with him. The total of the killed 4S and prisoners whom my army killed
and took, ivas . . . Thus says king Darius, Then the country was mine.
40 This is ivhat I did in Arachosia. Thus says king Darius . . .
Col. iv.
50 Thus says king Darius, Thou, O king, who shalt be after me, any
man who lies 51 against liars, who are many, I warn (thee) :
.... He who lies 52 make known how it was done. Do thou
. . thy going (?). 5:i he says, Hear what PRTR says.
54 see also before thee. 55
Jfi lies .... " this . ... if thou hide not . . .
,r'8 increase, and thy days be long; but if thou hide
59 Thus says king Darius, These are the men who stood on my side till
I had killed that Gaumaia G0 the Magian, who said, ' / am Smerdis '.
They were especially distinguished in my sight. G1 Indaphemes, by name,
son of Vayaspara a Persian : Gaubaruva son of Mardonius (?) G2 a Persian
a /Vrsian 63
Plate 52, containing the recto of the papyrus. For the verso (pi. 53),
which has nothing to do with Behistun, see no. 63.
The restorations are translated from the Babylonian text (Bab.), and
will not be discussed where they are quite satisfactory. All the lines in
this part of Bab. are defective at the beginning.
Line 1 = Bab. 1. 50. The numbers of killed and prisoners are
missing in Bab. The first numeral here must be /// since units are
always arranged in threes. The number of prisoners cannot be restored.
Vihy\ is taken by Sachau as K^n the rebel ' troops ', and consequently
'mru as ' a second time '. But e. g. in I. 8, where the phrase is similar,
we have NHIO, not 'o JP7JH, and nowhere else in this version is N"6n
s 2
26o ARAMAIC PAPYRI
used in this sense. It would be N^n as in 1. 7. The phrase elsewhere
in Bab. is ina lanilum harrdni ' in a second campaign ', though ina
laniium alone would be usual for ' a second time ' ("mm). Perhaps
the expression Ylhv^ Tnri3 means 'a second time', properly 'twice', cf.
D^n B>7B> in Exod. 2314, &c.
Line 2. np"iy7 restored from 1. 4, q. v. NJT13 for NnTS as in 1. 23?
and 352. [^]"IJ?D as often. Hence Bab. is issidannu not issi dannu.
Line 3 17 tap constructio ad sensum, if X^n is rightly restored as subject,
cf. 1. 48. NH-107. The 7 might be used simply to mark the object,
to avoid misunderstanding, but really it represents Bab. ana in the phrase
idduku ana nihrfitu. Cf. also 1, 5. The number of killed here does not
agree with the number in Bab. but the latter may be a mistake for 5046
(so Ungnad). Then the number of prisoners may also be incorrect.
The space between 11. 3 and 4 ought to have contained the words
'mm "ins (or more) "3 "3 *** // HI Tins* pm. Bab. has ina sanitum
harrdni, though it ought to be ' in a 3rd campaign '. Either it is a
mistake, or it means ' in another campaign '.
Line 4. '? [n]pnj?7 = later Aram, sms'7 'to meet', ' against ' (Seidel
and Ungnad), cf. njnjp in the fragment on pi. 57, no. 3, 1. 6, and "J^iy
Sirac. 137. VTO. The name, which is preserved in the Elamite
version (Uiyama), must be 1JH (Ungnad).
Line 5. [sms] supplied as in 1. 2, but it is doubtful whether there is
room. N>"nE7 cf. on 1. 3.
Line 6. The numbers are lost in Bab. -p3y a slip for "Qy. The
scribe perhaps intended to erase \ [n]ri3B cf. 1. 11, &c. Ungnad eft.
Job 36s p!D3). [u~nN3] is probable in Pers. but is omitted in El.
The space between 11. 6 and 7 should have contained the words njtf »f ny
J-I7TN »n»7.
Line 7. '•D^y is a mistake for ^y (Ungnad). "jr is not in Bab.
Line 8. I have restored lynty, as the plural seems to be used with
vb'n. [l»n 7Dp] (or DVT) = Bab. dukuhiniltu. Cf. 2813. HDDD7 =
Bab. ana kasadu ' on arrival '. It is a literal translation, not (as Ungnad)
a mistake for iTDCE7, and not an Aramaic idiom.
Line 9 a short line, left blank after the numerals. It is an interesting
example of omission due to homoeoteleuton. The scribe wrote N2"lp H2y
{itephi saltu) and then continued from the second N21p nay, thus omitting
all the passage which is now illegible in Bab. (Another fact which may-
interest those who doubt the genuineness of the papyri). The missing
passage, restored from P. and El., is ' in Izala in Assyria. Auramazda
was a strong helper. By the protection of A. my army fell upon the
THE BEHISTUN INSCRIPTION 20T
rebels. On the 1 5th day of Tebet they had joined battle '. He was
copying of course from an Aramaic exemplar (not from the original
inscription) and the omission must therefore be due to a mere over-
sight. 7Dp. The subject is apparently Dftim. 2034. Bab. 2024.
Line 10 omits (before the date) 'in Utiyari in Armenia. Auramazda
was a strong helper. By the protection of A. my army fell upon the
rebels'. D10H1 (for DDli"il\ At this point the Babylonian fragment
(see pp. 249, 250) begins. It supplies some phrases lost in Bab.
Line n. The prisoners are i57[8] probably. Bab. 1558. [OTW3]
in P. and El., but not in the Bab. fragment. Between 11. n and 12
supply (as between 11. 6 and 7) n^IN* "HC^ ri3K n ny.
Line 12. ['HJd^TN if so to be restored, must be a mistake for rPTN
HO^J (so Ungnad), or ^TN a participle 'going', cf. Ahikar 1. 38 am.
"JT m[na] Bab. (with the fragment) adds ' who spoke saying, I am king
of Media '. There seems to be no room for this here.
Line 13. The Aramaic is again rather shorter than Bab.
Line 14. The name of the month is lost in Bab. The Persian has
Adukanis, perhaps = Marheshwan. There seems to be no room in
Bab. for the number of killed and prisoners.
Line 15 quite uncertain.
Plate 54 in two columns, very much injured. In col. i the beginnings
of the lines are lost, in col. ii the ends. The length of the lines is shown
by 1. 17, where the beginning is certain, following the end of 1. 16.
The Aramaic is shorter than Bab. A literal translation would make
some of the lines of the right length (about 65 letters) but not all. In
col. i there is a blank space at the top. Some lines correspond to the
Bab. fragment, others agree with the fragments on pi. 56, nos. 3 (but this
is a different recension) and 7.
Line 16. NDD cf. 1. 48* and Ahikar 1. 36.
Line 17. IflJlE is right, it must have changed places with l~n£,an
error due to the similarity of the two words.
Line 18 was evidently much shorter than Bab. of which (as restored by
K and T from P. and El.) the full equivalent would be n»B> KTIS "in B»K
. . . xnns "did -ny noc nn rr6c» nnx "inc. The restoration
here is only a conjectural selection. "•["inro]. The * is certain.
Fragment 3 of plate 56 begins here (a 2nd copy).
Line 19. [SvTv] = ana uku. The line is again short. It should be
. . . snip my x^n Dy b>th bm nnx •b lyoc tb n tPYio ab'rb
26a ARAMAIC PAPYRI
The Babylonian fragment begins in this line, and also no. 7 of plate 56,
from a third (?) copy.
Line 20. There is not room for *W N^n (as in Bab. fragment) before
Line 21. Prisoners 6,972 as in Bab. fragment, but Bab. has 6,572.
The space between 11. 21 and 22 should contain the words ND?0 BWYl]
[may nnnm] pun n nil ni[n ^ xn» ins -i»n p. The unbracketed
words are found in fragment 3 of plate 56, which must belong to a
different recension, since the relative positions of the remaining words
would not fit this recension.
Line 22, after HOC, omits 'in Tarava in Iutiya by name' (by homoeo-
teleuton?) and inserts '•DID. At the end there is room for either lift or
*1CN, but not (if 1. 23 is rightly restored) for 'he rebelled in Persia, he
spoke to the army saying ', as Bab. rn[H] is very uncertain. The
fragment of the other copy, however, has nm which is merely, a mistake
for mn. The letters here may be JVIT, with the 1 crowded in rather
above the line.
Line 23. NT123 (Ungnad) is the most probable reading. Perhaps it
is a scribal correction of NTlVa ' in Iutiya '. "jita is the same word as
in Bab. fragment allak 'barracks'? L^M*l]3 V very doubtful. Bab.
fragment has a sign which is probably the beginning of Iutiya. In Bab.
the passage is lost.
Line 24. [mc] cannot have stood in 1. 23 and is therefore necessary
here. The next words are restored from the fragment. The first
legible letter is probably D rather than i[dn]. If so, the phrase ' Darius
the king says thus ' is omitted. In Bab. the end of the line is uncertain.
K and T read uku sa Parsumi isi. Weissbach objects to the form
Parsumi and reads Parsu mist. Certainly isi would be expected here =
•vyr.
Line 25. Beginning restored from P. and El. supported by the frag-
ment. HID ■[ as in the fragment, not HD3 *T as D1D2 »T in 1. 24.
"•DIB is apparently the last word of the line, therefore no room for "Hay.
Line 26. [nn!?E> DlflBWU] cf. 1. 38 and the fragment, where also the V
of SJ>1 is certain, though I cannot guess at the word. HD1 is strangely
written. It may be a mistake for nth (as Bab.), or the meaning may be
' the army of Persia and Media (which was) with me, went away ' i. e. to
Ariawarzi — a better sense than Bab., though icy is awkward.
Line 27. The restoration is based on the fragment, but it makes the
line rather lohg. At the end Dy ^TN or Dy nnN (cf. 1. 31) is wanted,
but neither fits the space. The n is doubtful.
THE BEHISTUN INSCRIPTION 263
Line 28 is shorter than Bab. Either N3*ip my or 31p T3y»7 was
omitted, or TWDN '? npny?. If the last is omitted the line is about the
right length.
Line 29. Bab. is broken here. It seems to have omitted the numbers
of killed and prisoners.
Line 30. Ungnad reads V after [sij^yt. At the end np (or np)
suggests [D]*lp, preposition or verb? It does not occur elsewhere in
this version (but *]ncnp 1. 54).
Line 31. JOVK^B? is only a guess at the Aramaic form of the name.
Line 32. So far as the remaining letters can be pieced together, this
line differs almost entirely from Bab. [HB>]n or [tlDJn (Ungnad).
The name of the month is lost in Bab. The Persian has Garmapada,
and so El.
PI. 54, col. ii. The ends of all the lines are lost. Judging from 1. 34,
where the restoration is probably right, the lines were of about the same
length as those of col. i. A small fragment (pi. 56, no. 8) of another
copy, supplements 11. 46-48.
Line 33. Bab. must have omitted either the number of killed &c.
or the mention of the capture of Vayazdata.
Line 34. ton collective, 'the nobility'. I have restored. the verb in
the singular, but it is quite as likely to have been plural.
Line 35 is difficult to restore as the phraseology is unusual. nOE^ is
probable. The marks after it may be a numeral, but hardly ion, as
Sachau and Ungnad. [s"l]ni restored from Bab. Sachau [N"jm,
which would require a different restoration. I do not know whether
rQ~¥ would be the word used here, or NB'pU (depending on DEtJ') as
in Bab. XTTirU . The form of the name is quite uncertain.
Line 36. The numeral is in an unusual position if it refers to Nin
or N"n. Bab. is broken here. K and T restore 'Darius the king says
thus ', which cannot have stood in the Aramaic. The latter part of the
line I have left blank since nothing further is wanted here (according to
Bab.) nor in the blank space following.
Line 38. '"\2 *in tr"Nl is parenthetical ' with a man over them '.
K3V1. The form of the name is conjectural.
Line 39. N7WI. The 7 is restored to agree with Bab. ana [uku].
Line 40. We should expect N7TI "1I1N (Bab. arki), but the reading
is clear. mvi (so) a mistake for mpi. The name of the place
([Kapisakajna) seems to have been mentioned in Bab., but there is
not room for it here.
264 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Line 42. The passage is broken in Bab., but there appears to be no
room for the numbers. The date is restored from P. and El.
Line 43. Much of Bab. is omitted here (again owing to homoeote-
leuton) after 3"ip )12]}. As restored by K and T from P. and El. it
would have had ' then in a second campaign the rebels assembled and
went against Vivana to give battle. In Gandutava they joined battle
with the rebels '.
Line 44. Bab. is broken, and the numbers (if stated) are lost. At
the end ?IN, or, if that is read at the end of 1. 45, perhaps pS3.
Line 45 must be shorter than Bab. I have conjecturally omitted
' whom Vayazdata sent '.
Line 46. P"l[y] if correct, cannot be ' fled ' (as Ungnad), which would
require a preposition. It is perhaps used with a place-name as *| npiyi?
with persons, ' towards'. [nyijoa might be [xn]ca, as Ungnad. N^n
may perhaps be read on the fragment (pi. 56, no. 8) which begins here.
Line 47. If [K3]*lp *i[^y] is right, the beginning as restored seems
necessary, and the passage must have differed somewhat from Bab.
["insi] is restored from the fragment, where it is certain. It is a purely
Babylonian word, which would not be expected here since 72 would
do perfectly well, and is commonly used to sum up elsewhere.
Line 48. -"6ttp is clear, and therefore nnNI is required. In Bab. the
passage is broken. For the position of the numeral after nnxi cf. 1. 36.
[NJ"iO "ins*] restored from the fragment, which must belong to a copy
similar to this because the words fit into the right relative positions,
but not part of this copy apparently. There is a broad blank space
after 1. 48*, which no doubt marks the end of a column.
Line 49. There is hardly room for ilJK after n r«T as in 1. 36.
After [riJ-Qy the line may of course have been left blank, and the
fragment might then have fitted here.
Plate 55 has two columns, of which col. ii (see above, no. 61) is not
connected with the inscription. Col. i seems to be the end of the
inscription. It is so much damaged, and the facsimile is so difficult
to read, that I have simply adopted Ungnad's transcription for the
most part.
Line 50 begins ' thou who shalt be king after me ', but the succeeding
lines do not correspond to either of the two passages in Bab. where
this address occurs. On the whole it is best to equate 1. 50 with Bab.
1. 105, since 11. 57 + seem to agree to some extent with Bab. 11. 107 + .
Line 51. }NW. The adverb &WB> is wanted. "IHTN (?). Sachau
' I warn', rather than for "imTX (216). The end is quite uncertain.
THE BEHISTUN INSCRIPTION 265
Line 52. T3y for lay? as in 1. 6. "jrabn is obscure. It cannot be
the Jewish rD?n.
Line 53. ru[s]. Ungnad's "p" is perhaps right. "ima a name ? Or
cf. "pma (Pers. fratard). "i»S\ Can this, in either place, be Bab.
' see ' ? Bab. has wa>« £«a/« iarnman, but ims cannot be read 13ns
(Pers. palikara) ' image '.
Line 54. 22DD more probable than pDC (Ungnad).
Line 55. BWS. The name of the king of Elam is so written
elsewhere in the inscription. It can hardly be a name here.
Line 56. , , . n. Ungnad DN'pn, meaning?
Line 57. jsijnn 'S fairly certain: 'hide' i.e. prevent the record from
being known.
Line 58. [}QVnn |]m is no doubt to be restored. Ungnad prints it as
though he read it. The blank space after 1. 58 should contain the
curse which follows in Bab.
Line 59 apparently corresponds to Bab. 1. 109, giving the list of
Darius's generals. JDp (or ptDp?) is fairly certain. Ungnad fnp, and
so Sachau in the text, but |lDp in the index.
Line 60. The end of the line is blank according to Ungnad.
Line 61. The restoration is purely conjectural. »JTlO is Sachau's
suggestion. The small fragment on pi. 56, no. 8, reverse, perhaps
corresponds to some part of 11. 62 + . The obverse of it has been noted
as agreeing with 11. 46 + .
The following are fragments of a copy or copies of the version of
the inscription :
Sachau, plate 561 obv.
rw]K T> nrrp^ f? n [ 1
] mrvnai mrvDaa [ 2
].-ijn may njs rar[ 3
•TO-i]inN [*]t rbbtii n[ 4
Bab. line 24 (end) :
Dariyamus sarru kiam ikabbi sarrutu sa lapani
25 [ggruni Hekmu i?ia ojjrisu ultazziz anaku etepusu bitati sa ilani sa
Gumatu agasu Magusu ibbulu anaku
20 [ ] sa Gumatu agasu Magusu ikimusunutu anaku uku ina
asrisu ultazziz Parsu Mada
27 \ji mdtdti sani/wui sa itekmu ana law ina asriht anaku ultazziz
ki sa time panf\ ina silli sa Urimizda aga anaku etepus anaku uptekid
adi muhhi sa bitu attunu ina asrisu
266 ARAMAIC PAPYRI
2S [uliazziz ] anaku ina silli sa Urimizda libbu sa Gumatu
agasu Magusu bitu attunu la issu.
Sachau, plate 56s2.
Obv.
]*»*> • [
1
~\2]vzb £t[k
2
] pm[
3
] K»n[*ia
4
Djisa [
5
*]? ab['n
6
M
7
]»y n [
8
Rev.
///
ron
Bab. line 36 + is as follows :
. . . umu 26 (KAM) sa kislimu seltu \nitepus Dariyamiis sarru Xv'Jam
ikabbi arki anaku ana Babilu attalak ana Babilu la kasadu ina Zazannu
sumsu sa kisad Purattu
37 [Ni'dinlubel agasu] sa ikabbu umma anaku Nabukudurriusur \ilti
uku ittalak ana far. ia ana epis fahaza] arki seltu nitepusu Urimizda
issi dannu ina silli sa Urimizda uku sa Nidintubel 38 [adduku ]
salti nitepusu umu [2 {KAM) sa Tebetti]
Sachau, plate 56*.
Obv.
Rev.
]m«[
v vb*]rb M't «^n itap
] +> III nrw p[n
1
2
4
5
TV[
6
>?..
1
n* wnntc
2
]p» nronirw
.3
]wnm
4
THE BEHISTUN INSCRIPTION 267
Sachau, plate 56°.
Obv.
Rev.
] x^n[
* • ♦
1
1 iPL
M
0
]nfo[a
JiS[
31
3
4
Plate 56° Obv.
Rev.
V =4
• •
1
S»Jbp[
M
^
Plate 567 Obv.
Rev.
See under 11. 19-21.
]nn[
Plate 56s Obv.
Rev.
See under 11. 46-48.
See under 11. 61 +.
Plate 56;l Obv.
Rev.
illegible.
]*L
Plate 5610 Obv. illegible.
Rev.
>- 1 »l
Plate 5611 Obv.
Rev.
M
]=*":[
.
Plate 50^ Obv. and rev. illegible.
Plate 5613 Obv. ]V s[^n
Rev.
]"
jN3[np
]///[
Plate 5614 Obv.
Rev.
m
noth
ing certain
]mo[
]•*[
]M
iro]"ii[ns
268
ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Plate 561"' Obv.
Plate 5616 Obv,
Rev.
J///// 1
blank.
Rev.
H
nothing certain
Plate 5617 Obv.
Rev.
ljm[
nothing certain.
Plate 5618 Obv.
]rna[
Rev.
]ims[
nothing certain.
Plate 5619 Obv.
Rev.
]*«[
blank.
Plate 56'-" both sides uncertain.
Plate 56, containing twenty fragments :
No. 1. Obverse, corresponding to Bab. 11. 24-28. Line 1, at the
beginning restore NriWE as Sachau. nrvp^ is passive. Line 2.
'31 Din^D^J should refer to the property of the people, not of the gods,
and corresponds to some words lost in Bab. 1. 26. Line 3 = the end
of Bab. 1. 27. Line 4 = part of Bab. 1. 28. rbb\22 is probable.
Double b = •), cf. rnnro Ahikar 1. 159. But the first 7 may only be part
of a large D. The word would then be rb\22, as usual. The Aramaic
was apparently shorter than Bab. There does not seem to be room
for a translation of all the end of Bab. 1. 26, and the beginning of 1. 27,
unless the Aramaic lines were of exceptional length. This was not the
case, judging by the amount to be covered by Aram. 11. 3 and 4.
The reverse is not Behistun, see no. 62.
No. 2, obverse. Ungnad eft. Bab. I. 36 + on the ground that in 1. 5
[n]"lQ3 is the Euphrates which is only mentioned there. Sachau takes it
as imQ2, and connects it with I. 18+ above. The fragment does not
fit either place, and may belong to a different recension. Line 4.
X""IJ["10] so Sachau, cf. 11. 17, 19. There is a trace of 1. Line 5.
[D]ian more likely than [n]isa. Line 7. Perhaps 2 x[21p] with
a date. Line 8. |/]Dy probably.
Reverse, unimportant.
No. 3, obverse, see under 11. 18-28.
Reverse probably not Behistun. See no. 62.
No. 4, obverse. Line 3. Cf. the last numerals in 1. 11. The next
line however does not fit that passage.
THK BEHISTUN INSCRIPTION
269
Reverse also Behistun. The other copies are not written on the back.
Sachau suggests that it belongs to the end, containing the curses.
Nos. 5, 6 unimportant.
No. 7 see under 11. 19-21. Reverse unimportant.
No. 8, obverse, see under 11. 46-48. Reverse, see under 1. 61 +.
Nos. 9-12 unimportant.
No. 13, obverse Behistun. Reverse, probably accounts.
No. 14. Sachau's reading. Only the last three lines are legible on
the facsimile.
Nos. 15-20 unimportant.
Sachau, plate 57.
No. 1. «l^n[
No. 3. n]oti> no[a
j//////^[l
]na[j
J&ata w[nm
]n njnrf>[
blank.
No. 7.
blank.
No. 10. illegible.
No. 12.
No. 14.
No. 16.
]///[
M
]bh[ti
No. 2. ]n[
No. 4. na]y n^ oyj/uo
space.
]b«5[
Nos. 5 and 6 nothing legible.
No. 8.
"IjnN
No.
9-
■n
No.
1 1.
blank
y
+» ///(_
No.
J'L
13-
msa
No.
15.
M
]"».[
27o ARAMAIC PAPYRI
Plate 57, twenty-nine fragments, of which nos. 1-16 are Behistun.
No. 1. Line 2. Sachau conjectures |yo[nu*0 to], but n is not possible.
V is possible, but doubtful. Line 3. Perhaps Nn*"i03 and not as
Bab. mi is certain. Not [N7]rQ") (as Sachau). Darius would hardly
have recognized any N^nm but himself.
No. 2. Line 3. rjj perhaps part of 73roTJ, and therefore belonging to
Bab. 1. 37.
No. 3. Line 3. ^[1] quite uncertain. Line 4. '"I3[y] not no (as
Ungnad), if the fragment belongs to Bab. 11. 46-50; see below.
Line 6. nyiy7 if correct, is for np"iy? elsewhere. Line 7 was the end
of a column. See further on, no. 7.
No. 4. Cf. 1. 6 after which there is also a space. The fragment does
not, however, fit that or any other context apparently.
Nos. 5, 6 unimportant.
No. 7. 13y07. Note the form of the 3 with its long rounded tail.
The blank shows that this was the end of a column. Sachau suggests
that nos. 3 and 7 (Ungnad, 1, 3, 4, 7) go together. Certainly the last
line of no. 7 is the natural continuation of the last line of no. 3, and the
blanks correspond. The two fragments then seem to precede pi. 52
and to correspond to part of Bab. 11. 46-50. No. 1 seems to come
before them. Nos. r, 3, 7 may be restored somewhat thus :
D1S n K^n]
mnptra nop nmim H07 nrbv xj^n [n:x "ins mn "vyr 'oy v hdi
?tk mrnn "ins (?)Dn7top] *b \yn[w vb n no n N^nb ?w m»K
12V no!?
H703 snyo nronviK (?)noy wS7] nm sjid: ^t b*n njoe* n»[a anp
snip nay nao7 /////// ,3 n7N KH-107 "tap nn N^jn *no-i[inN »»
enm -ion p X370 bwyi nnr* prn . . . +»]/// /// t)7[l itap
*? |j*ob* s*7 »? smo K7T1 rnos nn?e> ra-nK? ^d-i-in] H3[y nop
(?) DH7Dp
KmD lB03nN n0OO7 D-11N7 7?]K Bm[n "ins IMS* p] N370 B*i[nm
d-i-in3 not^ ma N3ip nay inr* anp] nayob [bhtt] n nyny7 [17TN
H7N NH-107 17DP ^r N7"n -itJo-ii.-in »l fi7D3 ynyo *iro[ninN'
The details may not be all correct, but this seems to fit the three
fragments. As elsewhere, the Aramaic is shorter than Bab., e. g. it omits
the latter part of Bab. 1. 47. (If no. 4 comes in here, it must belong to
THE BEHISTUN INSCRIPTION 271
another copy). On the other hand it gives the number of killed and
prisoners, which Bab. must have omitted. (There is a break in Bab. 1. 47,
but not room for the numbers). The text then continues, without a break,
as in Aram. 1. 1, the beginning of a new column, so that it and these three
fragments may all belong to the same copy.
Nos. 8-12 unimportant.
No. 13. man 'on the Euphrates' or [llmso 'in Parthia '.
No. 14 belongs to the account of Dadarsis.
Nos. 15, 16 unimportant.
Nos. 17-29 not Behistun. See above, no 64.
INDEX
X = ailX 24'&c. 8i4-5 &c. 834&c.
3N = T 92.
3X month Ab 141.
3« father: <3N Ah. 33.33. 113N
447 Ah. 15.27. WOK 71525
Ah. 5.47.85.138. ni3« 257
Ah. 55. D313K 20''. pH3X
(our fathers) 3013 3 1 12. DiTTOK
7 12.
13X : H3N 3016. *13X^ 1527. naxn
(3rd fem.) 7 128. max Ah. 94.
.13 X pr. n. 616.
pnax pr. n.? 8212.
pi3K pr. n. 811.
D13N Abydos 38s 64, 26 ? [821'3].
KP3M (or p") a fine 43° [46s1].
XJirax 2014 2515 28'° [45s].
1.T3N pr. n. 220 2417.
\T3X pr. n. 392 469[lsl.
WM m3 W3K 2 2!,°.
pna ma wan 22100.
W3N pr. n. 8i«-91-"5.
pm ma TV3X 8i9°.
px stone 1510 301010 3 19. spv ps
383. X33X 309[3i8]. weight:
xa^c ^3x3 57 614 814-21 915 104 1410
155.6.9.101434.86 2013 2510 433 4610.
nnD *jata n2.
(win ma "itpyax 22104.
2699
vnx 'a nwN 1022.
X11AX temple 1314 25" ^O«in.io-n-u-n-
22-24-27 oj8-10-12-16-21 -24-26 q q8 ^IIAX
3OH3I.3.
IAN (or IAN) portico? 54. X"UX
j-4-5-C-7-10-10-20i
IAN wages 6912 Ah. 164.
mA« a letter 3o18-19-24-29 3x1718'28 403.
j-pax 307 3i« 3810 4 15. xrnAx
427, pi. XrnAX 371--..
. . . crx 'a han 199.
nx see is .
pN 144 20' 251 351 [4.31] 68, 2, 4
Ah. [5.32.78]i27.
pXear: pnx Ah. 157.216. "pnx
Ah. 132. nrmx Ah. 97.
♦JIN? Ah. 171.
13JHX pr. n. (of a degel) 202 67, r.
mx month Adar 6i12 67, 4.
"Iftmnx Auramazda. Beh. 2[3J5.
5[I3]i3-I9[2o]28.28.4i[4i]43
[43], PP- 265, 266, 269.
1^ j-6-8-9 gl8-20-20-2G q813 j rl7-20[22]2C. 2014
2gU.ii.Hi4 289 455G.
DH1X 3312.
nix pr. n. 24s7.
px Ah. 160.
JT1D1X pr. n. 3018 3118.
nmassiK 26s.
74
INDEX
-«5>B1N 2622. me'B'iN 263,; " ''.
snyiN 212 [214 3li;j iic r,o,;.
nix pr. n. [ 181] 228BM1M 2426.
none '3 niN 2 314.
I^d '2 nix 22".
nni« pr. n. 69 87 92 1538 [193 22"]
2 (-2-4-0 13-17-20 qY1'1"1 ^S1'12.
J7BW pr. n. 122 1314 2290 631S 67,
1 1.
[nn]is 'a yens 193.
^A '3 JJKMN io21.
nin '3 y&rix 124.
mrV '3 J?B>1N* 12s.
ftvnn 'a jro '3 ytpw 22127.
PiWiK pr. n. 2o,s.
nrs 27s.
snanrx 177. tr-onm 175.
K»ya '3 13ns 56s.
blK 27s 305 314 s62 Ah. [38]75-
no. 120 Beh. 8.12 ?[27. 30.40.44.
46]. rbm (1st sing.) 402 Ah.
22.76. "I^IK Beh. [i]4.8.io.
24*. 26. ?TN (imperat.) 428
Beh. 7.18. I^TN Beh. 39.
PPiTN pr. n. 1 28 [185] 66,8.
nx i5 58 61S13 810 1310 2511 28s 435.
<na [564] 65,4. 67,8. -priN
40i-5 42i[i5i 564 68, 1 [Ah. 99.
100]. ^inx 68,8. \nins*
2521 281517 3018 3ils 345 Ah. 49
[72]. mnK for "runs 25s.
D3ins 2 12-11 4i[lln. *n« 2iri]211
40iti]B 41iti-9i [42i-i6j. pnx
20
10
D3TIX 2012.
nnt* sister i5 58 61313 810 13'° 25"
288435. nnx2 28265. 4. »nn«
68,8 [Ah. 8.25]. nnn»(hers.)
i2344432-,38210:(hiss.)[Ah. 12].
nninx 75s.
*inx take rnnK j Beh. 47] mns*(?)
52s (1st sing.) Beh. 14. nnN
693Bel).-f-.6.ii[2i.3o.33]34[34.
42.44.48], p. 266. prop Ah.
171. imnb 217 [3"]. nnnt*
34
[3l4
HnK secrets? Ah. 99.
nnw '3 axTiK 22-18 [2" 32J.
VnN pr. n. 515 618 io22 111".
[rvDnJn '3 vnx 34s.
jru '3 itin 231 2519.
•o:y '3 jru '3 vnx 22128.
mD^a '3 vns* io22.
-IPTIN pr. n. Ah. i.2[8.n]i3. 14
[2 1. 26.29. 34] 35.45.46.55. 60.62.
63[64.66]69[7o]76.
writ* pr. n. 2412.
Wionx pr. n. i71-r' 65, 11.
"ins afterwards : 98 135 208 2810 3068
316-7 [3312] [692]7in Ah. [4]8.
11 [21.24] [28.29] 36.39 [53] 54
[58]63.7t[74]i7i Beh. 2.4.6.8.
[9]n[i2.i4-i6.i8.i9.23]24[26]
26[27.30.3r.34.44.46.48]. nriK
p Ah. 99. after: '•TIN 67, 12
Ah. 6 Beh. 50. T»*inN 913 2871Z.
•anriN 89-ln 138. \-mnx 94 137
3810 Ah. 210. jnns Ah. 63.
oanns </ 2 59-1" pns* ^y
Ah. 53-64[i33]. other? fem.
mnx 1532 64,20. 7934 82'
INDEX
275
pm (pi.?) i533-
82*.
pnx other i4 5*8 8ni,il8-20M 9s-13
I09-U J cl0[l7]22-26t3i:l 206'12 26:"; 30n
[373] 38' Ah. 4ft, K3">nN[9u].
jnnN 8101s 97-9 1532 30s 71424 Ah.
[i4]37-39-4°-49-52-62.
wan '2 3*mnM 73™.
D'UinK pr. n. 632.
'HON pr. n. 133 Ezra 21".
•pN 167 Ah. 37 Beh. [52?] n fa
Beh. 52.
K^M Ah. 88. tm^M Ah. 87.
fe*WN ? ? Beh. 55.
. . 3D'« pr. n. 518.
TK month Iyvar Beh. 3, 10.
[29].
jg*K man 81112,G 2o10121314 2510-14
30" 3113 42s 493 67, 5. 716™9 Ah.
49 [72.83] 104. 1 1 4. 1 1 6. 1 1 6. 1 2 5.
I25-I34-I45 [i45] i5o[i5°]I59-
160.163. 200.218 Beh. [22~]38.
50-
h*N for »ITK? 46s 5 44 67, 7?
MVK 82393 l5"-82-S8 20M [2 I7] 274'6[23]
2812 292 353 374 [437J 64, 27 Ah.
159. WK iS 8"> 15M* 804
Ah. io5.in.ii2[ii7].
nag '3 jivk 61S.
^3N eat: Ah. [34]. btf 714?
Ah. [86] 89. bsn Ah. 127.
129. ^3ttfl[2i8]. 'boUKch 61*.
DDN: IMS* Ah. 157.
ba to [171 21111] 301 [311] 37W
38112 3915 4016 41'" [421>1B 564]
63°? 67,8.70' Ah. 155? ba n
nroy Ah. 107. 154. 161.
ba not [216-9 27"] 4271113 Ah. 52.
54. 6 1 [68]8 1. 96.97. 100-103. 1 06.
io6.ii9[i26] r26.i3o[i36]i36.
[i37jI37-I38-I4i-i43-r46-i48.
153-157 [*57] 193-194-206-208.
218.
ba God Ah. 156? 173?
nba God: 1314. vnsv rbx [2715]
302" 312 32s 38[2]3r' 401. KPl^N
oig 2" 64 78 221 25° 27s 305-6-24'28
3I7.24.25 338 38! [44S] 454 69!2
7215 Ah. [149.198]. jnbtt our
god 715. jnta gods 7 123? Ah.
95. 115. 115 [122] 124. 124. 128.
i35[i5i]i6o. 'nbx 3014 3113
7I8-2C. KVlta 1315 171 2 12 347
[371] 391 [411] 561 Ah. 94.126?
nnr£x goddess 145. Nnr6x 7216.
nbn these, see n3T.
-pi?N Beh. 23.
h?K month Elul 51 201,
"I^N these, jf<? *]T.
pji»K teach. (£k)V Ah. 80.
Kafi^M [Ah. 83].
^K a thousand 244043 3127 [33"].
*B$>N 71W. ej?| j« eji>.
DX = DDS' 1 3" 346-
DN mother: HON 2845 Ah. 138.
}OK (our m.) 2 83. D.TDN 25s 2813.
HDN maidservant: io10 Ah. 84.
nDK cubit: 790--4, pi. JOS* 8M 94
j g8.M1 2610-14-1G 3622 (33II ^2-4#
D'UIIEK Amyrtaeus 3516.
T 2
276
INDEX
mriDN pr. n.? 69" 69 D.
|dn: nnwD*n Ah. 132.
ncN sheep : tonotf Ah. [120] 121.
"pot* [Ah. 121].
1DN say : 21 51 62 72 8l 9' 131 141
I52 2017[2I10] 252262M282[291]
352 3713 3810 394 [4447 451] 4912
64, 26. 65s 69s 7 112 761 807 Ah.
2[3]ii[i3J2o[25]32[34.37.42]
54. 56. 59[72. 75] 78.1 10. 1 18. 166
Bch. [7. 12. 16.17. 22. 22^7. 34. 37
[37.48-50.59.60]. meK 3rd
fem. i1 io2 [431] 555 68, 4 Ah.
1 19. mON (1st sing.) 95 i6M
436Ah-[5-i5]24-45-49Beh.7.i8.
mON (2nd sing.) [Ah. 75].
n»K 26s[6]» 321 4 14 8o28 Ah. 58
[67.77]i2i. pcx 1st pi. 402.
ncx^ 15" 379 Ah. [6s]i94.207
Beh. 53.53 ? nmDK* Ah. 158.
l»Nn (3rd fem.) i8[lls 1523.
1I0M 1 st sing. 512 820 914 io1'
1531-88 4ys Ah. [26.29J57.139.
11»K» [42s] pntMP 7l82- "MM?
1 st pi. [i6]. 1DN imperat.
Ah. 58. no« ptcp. 294 [Ah.
59], pi. pON 2 623 271022 304 3 122
337 37G 69 B ? }"•" 3022. TDK ?
Ah. 210? *1DN»^ Ah. 115.
100i> 322 [432]. "06 23 5312
64 [74"«] 83 93 io3 [n1] 132 153
168 204-0 [213] 254 282 L292]
3°7 353 394 425 444 45t3]3 [491]-
■jnDN thy words Ah. 102.
)K where (or ]tnrh) is25-29.
■u
K33K [164]. "p33K [Ah. 165].
dun^? 2 2133. novhk? 7220.
H3N ego : 53'11 6s-7'8'12 77']oi 83S1718-21
g3-514 jo2-0-8-J<M2-12 j 4-' 1 1 J c3 ■< I l68l
2Q9 2591212 285-8 29< 35O 38S 4O2
43[al8t7-7.9] [4g3] 64j I9_ 8l"«»-W-
uobnl Ah. [3.6-8. 14. i5]i7[2i]
25 [29] 40. 46. 52. 57. 66.204. 205.
207 Beh. [i2]2i a*[23]24.27.36
[37]59[6o], p. 265, 3. jn3K
i2ri. rnrux 2;,ii-,n 2o[419-10-12
263'8 2 71'10'10'12'20'22 282'9,11 qo15'202G
3I14.19 377[irJ [422] Ah. 59.61. 121.
SJ3K J ''MN 15W Ah. 14.101. PS3H
[Ah. 197]. pD3S'^? Ah. 134.
\"I1B3K Ah. 133.201.202. pQ3K
(our face) 3789.
tP3K 2 88-10. 6HP3S Ah. [89] n 6.
I 22[l 23. 1 24. 1 5 1. 1 62. l6 7.1 90].
ri3N thou : 2[912llC17 [319] 511-14 641S15
[74] 98IO-12 I08ie 208-11 258 2622
28™ [35"] 42" 445 478 66, 4
Ah. 34[42]5i.53.58[59]68.ioi.
127. 129. 149. 166 Beh. [5o]52
[53]. snjK fem. 8911122C 147.
DH3N 2i4[6] 3856[8]8 808 [Ah. 57].
rW3N wife, woman : 810 153233 2510-14
Ah. 219. Knrox 79. nnsK
6312. DDK 3433S. 'TW3N 75 H
i54t271. inn3x 64 94G. nnruK
1518 46911 68, 12.
V13K marriage: 144 153 483. "antfUK
355-
from 'a miDs* 221.
DH31DK pr. n. 66, 12.
INDEX
277
■thea rna niDN 432tl3].
NCIV '3 "llnDN I e*"1*"M-M'*l«M,M.JM0[8T]
203-68-20.
'ON god-name 7216.
•B»3DN pr. n. 219.
n^3DK pr. n. 537.
YJ'ODN pr. n. 32!.
UC3DK pr. n. [22'22 33] 47 [44s].
n^iyDDD '3 nCDDN 610 87.
1DN : »J1DM 38s. -IDJV Ah. 80 ?
P'DN prisoners: 343[4] 64, 29.
TOIDM 69^.
H^B '3 "fl-lDR? 13'°.
pNmDN Esarhaddon : Ah. 5 [7], 10,
n, 13, 14 [19.23.28J32.47.53.
6o.64.65[7o]75[76]78.
DVCnDN pr. n. 34s.
nnDN pr. n. 2281.
fjN also: 423 67 710 81823 io19 131113
[163] 173 20° [2 17] 2510 2 710[12]
2812 oo9'17-19"21'29"30'3116'17 fqq13] 375
[437.447] 47« 547 69>2 8o« Ah. 19
[25.46]5i[57.7i]83.95[i04]io5.
io7[i3o] Beh. 54.
12N Ah. 52.140.
w&k? 26s.
"}DN.: IDN11 Ah. 156. N2DN Ah.
156.
bza? ]"6sn 1 st sing. pf. 134.
D»li>a« pr. n. 8 164.
D2N surely: 5811 615 81522 2015 2516
428[4610].
NJ2N? 8i1560.
'DSN? 2612.
y2N pr. n. [24*] 53*.
e|SN month Epiphi il 151 6$l!>.
1J"IDN god-name 7215.
b*!M Ah. 143.
"IN (or in) name of a wood : 2610.
mN Ah. 99.99.
njoiK io4 2 9[sj6-«. $oy:riN 8i60.
tB>ynjoiN[2i*]. nNDymN 2616.
miN 2* 38. pYiN 24-5[fil7-8 35 3314.
^mx 142. bnix 152.
lOnonN pr. n. 621.
PK 2610181*«3ou3i10. NnNAh.175.
mN fetter : Ah. 196. NPHN Ah. 80.
mN road : 25s. NIVIN [Ah. 164].
nniN Ah. 187.
N^N Ah. 88. 1 10. 1 10. mx Ah.
89.117.
lononN '2 KtJ»n« 621.
T>« : pans* Beh. 58. pn« ptcp.
303 313.
TIN length: 158-9-11 63". N31N
nr>K 52-2 72 1323 !52 252 29" 352
452 67,3,4. fern. n*BTK [43*].
pen* 2 82 65,5? n^din 143.
JVCHN in Aramaic 284-6.
D^IN pr. n. 81107.
n^lN 3020.
pDTM pr. n. 8145.
NynN 55 616 1519 30° 318 68, 11.
p-)N 67 83-8 93 [1315]. NpiN
65-712-15 8H-M-16-19.24 g5 814 Ah. Io8.
DY1K pi. n. Beh. 2.[5~7]8.ii.
"ittnN pi. n. Beh. 46.
DCHN pr. n. i7,l]5 213 2612227 27s
30430 31429 32s 375-8-9.14 [4212].
27«
INDEX
U3mN 51°: name of a degel 63
[458].
"HTTin pr. n. Bel). 25.26.31.
B'DB'nmN Artaxerxes 62 71 81 91 io!
13' 14' [15' 162] 1 77 [451]-
pDms* pr. n. 5'7 [73].
n^N* : *15W Ah. 89.
n&>N fire: 3012 Ah. io3.io4[i97J
222. NntPN 3111.
nTB*N pr. n. 51".
pB>N pr. n. 65, 5.
bwK: ^B>N 75B7l9].
^NrV30B>N god-name 22124.
yss* '2 mao^N 53°.
[0B'[n] pr. n. 241.
yDN '3 JOB'S? 2 44.
1X2: '2 MOB»K 539-
. . JB>N pr. n. 42s".
KTWM 26[3l5[519'21 2718 3011.
dn = tvn ? 492.
nnN come: 3711 82s Beh. [13.31.
45 J. titin 1 st sing. 53( + T^)
1 5s (+1^3). ins 308. pn«
ptcp. 38s. nnto [4 13] 8211 Ah.
[33]. T\mr\ (3rd sing.) Ah.
97.210.214. TIN imperat. Ah.
118. wn 2 4sG-'8. nnw 2613.
nwnk 2714.
linN Assyria: Ah. [2 J 3-5, 8, ic-
i4[i8]2o[23.28]32[36J37.43.55.
55[6i-7o].
NJnN 444 Ah. 91.
... 'a myriN 220.
-IDN 172 7 120 Ah. 34.97. N-inN
1319. n-)DN 62 32*.
pnns 2717.
pDTUUC name of a degel 6'-'.
^iriN (or ^TID?) pr. n. 5" 13'*
msiDN pr. n.? 66, 7.
3 = 33 ? 81 10f'.
"3: DV3 I1 &c. |l III III "5 3 &c.
31 &c. U3 2'1 44 5'3 828 9«" io21
I317 I412 I5C 15-37 jg4 2Q9 22123 2^27
2-18 2610[71 277 2815 35 e 43t8]u 49s
72s 7827923Ah. [9.23]. »|3 377-
>33? 1317. '333= »T3? 321.'
HU 82°. D1H3 3iK'. JH3 346[7)
82". N^3 [Ah. 102].
1N3 27". [Nl]3 27s-8.
HN3 pr. n. 53s.
B*N3 : VH2* [Ah. 64]. B»N3 3017
31"'. NB*N3 [Ah. 45]. rre*K3
38°. NnB'-NS 30'7 [Ah. 25.50.
81].
33 = 331 1310.
33 ? 8 I 51fi-l7-iyt20]23-25-C3-72-7G-7t(-113n4-128-130-
133^
33 gate: 66,7. 69s? Ah. [9]i7.23.
N33 3434.
!>33 pi. n. [Beh. 12].
N^33 619.
BTQA3 pr. n. 5110.
na pr. n. 7214.
pA3 pr. n. 171?
ma pr. n. 66, 6.
ib'odn 'a ma [324].
m3i33 '3 ma 518.
"ma pr. n. 301 [311] 321.
psa pr. n. i6[l)6.
INDEX
279
'nun 'a psA3 22133.
KT3 Ah. 30.
rinnana? 9ri.
nra: nran (2nd sing.) [Ah. 106J.
ma Ah. 90.
T?3: nma Ah. 168. N3 prey?
o7 •
yrn Ah. 41.
pT3 Ah. 206.
jra: \njjnan [Ah. 132]. pro?
Ah. 203.
nnna pi. n. [Beh. 18].
ND2 : 02n (2nd sing, jussive ?) [Ah.
96].
|D3 Ah. 161.217. woa 26". ^ua
Ah. 139. crura [711].
prab 2610.
I|6*3? 6l57.
pa between: 513 7810 219 29* 45'
Ah. 40.62[69]ii3[2o6J2o6. p3"'3
51314 2814. onra (= '»a) 1311
257.
sn^3 (see also NJVQ) : [21] 63417
^2[3] 82-28916 io23 1421"- 2012 25s2
°67 278'5-7^ 281'15 2Q1 qo1'5-8'13'25
3I.-,7.24324 336-9 432 45X[2]966, 6.
8ofi 823. nT2 63 134 27s 30s.
N1V3 ^3'4 8815'22"27 O3'4"61112 iq2-5-7 013-1J
258ll.i5.lC 3q3 425-5-6 [^(JS-IO ^4
66,7, M- 8111] Ah. 48. n»3
C-5-13 68-10 83-5'6-6 7'7 1 3U13H 2^4'5'5' '
7.20 [2p4] 3,13 3810 [46io] 56» 66,
14 8i109 82s Ah. [i68]222. 7V3
arano 32s. jota n»a 2l2H,c
125 [131]. |33^T <3 [2"] 3"
,n^ 55.5 68 7^]s 4 16 Ah.
1 o •'.
[313] 43
[7Ml0]
22[22ji39.i40. *]JV3 78y 153
347 4 1'5 Ah. 52. »3rV3 81-22.
nrya 1 518-30 Ah.[7i.84]i97. nrpa
8124. sum 81110. &»na?8inB
NT)3 346 Beh. 23. pro (our
houses) 38s. DlfTTQ p. 265, 2.
p^Kn*3 pr. n. 5s7.
,il3i'N[n,3] pr. n. 2 2G.
jruirr '3 frutarps 185.
xrrc '2 fn^Nno 184.
i5y '3 npy^Nnn 129.
pr6xJV3 pr. n. 428.
Dpn^NnO pr. n. 2°-10.
D03 pr. n. 8 194.
^3 mind: "]^>3 Ah. 97.
vhl pr. n. 28s.
X73 be worn out : 3rd fern. [n]N^3
or ptcp. fem. [n]N?3 261.
i3$>3? pr. n. 2 4H.
H163 JO [Ah. 122].
vbl: py^T [Ah. 148].
H33 build : 520. IT33 2nd sing.
912. 133 3rd pi. [275J 3013 3112.
HJ3n 2nd sing. fut. 9s. flW 713.
U3 imperat. fem. 819 95. rmra
gS-6-9-1] gl4 3023# ITO^ [27"]
3023-25 3I2324 338, -J^ ptcp> pass#
270 3o14-25 3113 32* [330]. !T33
fem. 27s. nsSTf 3027 [3126
338]-
K*U3 the building : 912.
p33 construction : 30'° 319.
•a 83"' 93 82s Ah. i iT33 pr. n. 23
2«0
Hj3.; pr. n. 74a.
INDEX
morn 'a trmsa 519.
nnya pr. n. 192 2518.
nya 3ilc 50*. iya 3017. nya<
38s Ah. 24.53[64]. nyan Ah.
34. *ya imperat 420.
rtaya? Ah. 218.
^ya [46s ] Ah. 223. Ian ^ya Ah.
164. *?r\ 'a 59 1310. oyo 'a
2623. Nnoy 'a Ah. 42. pip 'a
Ah. 95. mp '3 59 1310 2o'°
46s. >^ya (my husband) 1523.
^>ya 87. n^ya 15421 [4616].
"jnau "»i>yn 30s3 3123. a11 '^ya
3022 3 122. N-ims *ba 8321.
na : inonN 505.
"13 SOn : 1 5-8-11 22-2l2ll9_2l ot2l22-23f24]
f-2-2-8-9-15-19 62.3-8-1012-13-16-22 «2ts] 82'5-
710-12-23-26-28— 35 g2-216-2l[22] jq2-20-22-24
j J1.12-1G j 2l-9-Hl ql-313-15-17-21 j j2-2-7-
9-11-13 j g2-17-20-37-39 jgl j q2-10 202'3,6'
1213-16-20 23I-I5 2 52_5-l°-l3-14-l7-21 282-
8.B-M-17 33I-5 345-5-5.5 352 371, 381.
1-12 402[5l5 4j[9]9 [4215] 435^11-12
4412 45W2W 462-n-io 4gi 49i-i
529-1753l-10562-4583.36l2.1162)I.
63G.c8.1015 65> 2. 66j Xj 6 67 6i
68, I O. 6910 YlH12[l6l *T24,11 17 o4-9— 11-
1316 74.I-6 8j15.26.28.31 82[2]22 Ah.
6.i2[i2.25]i39 Beh. [61J61.
pn-ia Ah. 217. ana 69 E?
Ah. 2[44]8o. naAh. i8[22]
30.30.82[96]i 27.129.149. »bl3
612&c.739. 113 65 68, 10. Ah.
[2o]8i. -j^na 613. rna 307
316 494 Ah. 1.5. 12 Beh. [23] 62 ?
ffna 2813 [392] Ah. 8. pa plur.
I532-32-33 25I7 Ah. 3.I06. "?a
2o'2]3-8-13-17-19-20 2K9 3O2'-' r^l28! 7l7'
NJV3 '33 303. '33 io15 138 I4'J
259-12-13 289 7,10, yft 97912 IO*
287-8ii 12 347 471 Ah. 127.129 ; for
D3-:a 25". '3'33 8MMMB 137.
'ni33 401 [4119] 548 71" >T:a
1534 68, 8. p33 (our sons)
2o10133O15-203i14. D3'33 20111314
2 516-
ma daughter : iB 58 61213 81012 148
2510131314 28810 435y 472 63s.
^Nia 149. ma 112 836 io»*"
I42 203 2537 181 2 22 &c. 353
43
tl]2-ll[l3l
64, 24. 65, 5. 68, 2, 4
'ma 9478 134.
nrna 83 13221
738 8131137.
•jma i53-5t0]483
1 8'-' 392. jnja(our daughters)
201013. D3n:a 2013.
N"I3 desert : [Ah. 208].
N"Q outside Ah. 109.
|DS03? 8 11".
'jm 'a nana 13".
nna pr. n. Beh. [23>7[37.
60].
K'3"13 pr. n. 56s.
Pl'313 pr. n. 2017 22130 2519.
p-ia Ah. 101.
xma = Nm'a 35s Beh. 2f5.23.31.
46].
-«5>3 Ah. 104 [206]. mtJ>a Ah.
89.
nhna Ah. 134.
INDEX
281
A (a measure) 21 243841.
H3A Ah. 107.
-QA 13811 2511 2814 3028 3127 Ah. 42.
98. 130. 132. 138 [159] 163. 163.
i64[i64]i77. -\2>h 12>h 2' 221.
N13A Beh. 45. p3A plur. 3016.
pnA2[6-7]7837[i210] 25H33566, 1.
Ah. 37[4o]62. una* 213 344
5o*« 64,29.66,1 Ah. [39]56[58.
67]77 [Beh. 59].
■pna? 55c-
SlA pr. n. 2017 25" 2815 290- 564
65, 2.
jnpik '3 bnx i3H.
nnya '2 bm 25'*.
iTaia '2 bna 2017 25".
, . . in 'a bna 46'4-
htf 'a hna 618.
n-nuno 'a otan '2 i?m 2 225.
niDB> 'n bm 2 228.
iT^A pr. n. 10" 22101.
m:y '2 n^iJi 620.
}nA: niiiA (1st sing.) Ah. 13.
1A: 1A2 see "2; HIA Ah. 160.
»mo '3 nrau [Beh. 61].
n»1A pr. n. [Beh. 59].
n:*via 24" 27s.
"ITA: "VTA ptcp. pass. Ah. 134.
blA^A pr. n. io2'.
^A pr. n. 491.
li?A: "-6a Ah. 1 19.2 1 1.
*bx : P^A 1 st pi. 3 78. "^AH Ah. 1 4 1 .
NDA papyrus-reed : 1 515.
N^OA Ah. 91.
nnm pr. n. 22 22121 [33'] 34"
vns* 'a nnoA 618 n16.
,tdto '2 mm 829 918 2 22.
JA 8i41.
33A : 2"3A ptcp. pass. 38*. 23A
(adj.) Ah. i2 5[i96]. P13JA
Ah. 84.221? n^23A 37s.
KT3A 26413 69 B.
NDA 731. N^DA 7318.
2iA 8i8-983. [ana Si™-42, pan*
mA Ah. [2i9]2i9.
nA: S3^A 149. in^A 67, 3.
wia 14s- V~w 6H 67> 5-
*anA^i6i310. *inAN612.' wix&
147. D3JnAN 2510. ♦Ml'VP 16.
OIAJ 14.
T»"tt 7 115.
WX: W?Xn Haphel? Ah. 139.
anx [Ah. 79].
vukI/i]? Ah. 161.
331 law-suit: 612 812142022 91310 139
^".U-ll !g26-29 201110 2 510 43<'6-9]
474-
nan : ina-i 3028 3127. anaio [270-4]
3026 3 j 25 3 2 io. xnano n"2 32s.
p3"l adjoin: 3rd Tut. fern. p3"in
55. p2T ptcp. 86 25s'5-8 66, 7.
np2T ptcp. fern. 54.
■>2T to lead 308 3 17.
-\21 word: -Qlby 6fii« 2881011 7130,
and see by. m3i^j>658. p-Qlby
403.
2«2
INDEX
pan? 3710.
i?AT 58M 6MB-10 7[3j3 82 92 13210 i4:i
15= 202 28s 29-2 352 [452J 66, 4.
67, 3- f&nb 432- i^"1 (oar
degel) 162. N^H 9- 204 65, 3.
|kfl 271.
N3A1 Ah. 129.
BHTI pr. n. Beh. [2J4.6f18.19].
am io\
in^x 'a byn (or ban) 220.
N»n pr. n. 1413.
rnn 79s-4.
Knna^n 27s.
^m : rbm ist sing. Ah. 45.
bmn Ah. 54. ^>nn: 377.
H= *T: *afr*l 137"".
none 'a niN 'a nn 2314.
JH law-suit, claim : [2"] 6,fi 81722-27
10" 181 2014 251517 28u-12-14 35 d
[4611] 67, 3, 5. 2211 p 6'2
81214-20-21 q1315 j q9-10 jj7-*J-11 j
>4[6-»]
r-2'J
O
201M6 25J0 434l6-0J 4?4. Ny-,
143. nana Ah. 198. nidd p
1531 ; [report, account? 211];
law-court: 204. K?1 77 28s;
judge: 8'3 io1319. SOH r6s-8fs»
422. pn 28s. »3n i3 167
N^-; 6^ 824 [1646] 27° [454J 808
82'.
DISH pr. n. 8110.
S31 this: 146. »31 149.
'an clean: pan 21° 2712.
nan remember : nan ? 34s.
121 male: 151720.
n^n pr. n. = jvin? 414.
"fa pr. n. 8 i2G"? 822.
nin: nbnn Ah. 113.
fT*Jn pr. n. 3029 3128 321.
*>n '2 n^n 822.
m blood Ah. 87.211. non Ah.
89.120.
n*r»n pr. n. 66.
|On value: 3028. 'on 13° 1514 294
3028 3127 362334 36b 449 45s 66,
12? 784 8 1119. \nion 133 36 b.
Diron 456.
pnjon pr. n. 204.
run = ro? 169.
r\:i loan? io23.
nn : ruT Ah. 138.
lyn: 1W Ah. 147.
Dinsn pr. n. 8i89.
. . A~n pr. n. 5 17.
Ann (verb) : mnn (2nd. sing.) Ah.
128. rnn [Ah. 126].
KATl pr. n. 518.
"Ann pr. n. 1319.
pjjnn '2 \D3T\1 62-7817[22] 85-2326.
*~\-l planks? 2620.
Wn Darius: 30,9213° Beh. [7.12.
16.17. 22.34] 37 [39.48-50.59],
p. 266.
tWlVTi Darius: 201 2i3[l01 251 2628
272 281 2915 3024 3i24-i9327 [67,
10].
Cinn Darius: i1.
"]~\1 (verb) Ah. 191.
Ah. 108.
PBH : K'PBH 3011.
Nvjnn 167.
'am ptcp.
DiTBH 3010.
INDEX
283
Nil voici: 677 1313 25* z83:' 34s-4
377 38° [44°] 542 Ah. [i6.i8]89.
93.116.145.
|NH where : n fNi"6 i52S (or n }K n?
as in i52y).
in = in Ah. 128.
numn pr. n. 6ly 2 2'-3.
'OKtsfi 'a nn 74s.
inn: inn Ah. 207. rron Ah.
108.
in 5'12 61" 8114 9Il]12 io14 igi-Ms
I41i5fl]21 201715 22,;&c. 24'1 251*18
281 354[7]y 3733G 387y [42s-14] 43[1]3
44" [451] 67.4- 7in 7218732Ah.
i8[i8]2i.2 4[2 7]28.36[40.42]44.
46.53f60.69J79.84.88.100.107.
io7[io9]ii5.i28(nn) 138.171
[196J209.209 [Beh.24]. Demon-
strative 22120.
nin pr. n. 124 2 230 343 42°.
rWWI pr. n. [i9] 22 [3s] 1910 22112127
442 46^'° 65, 18.
n^ia '2 rmvi io22.
■vdt '2 n[Tim] 2 23.
mytnN '3 mat 'a nmin 2018.
KTnn pi. n. [Beh. 35].
nin 83 io5 158-10 26s-9 274 3o«-7-yl2-12-25
3l6 3a6.8.n 33» [378] 413 437.8rio]
65, 3. 828 Ah.[2]4.5.i5[26.43j
72[77>40 Beh. [24.25.34.35]
45[47]. nin 3rd fem. 67 Ah.
[28]43Beh. i6.2iil*[48]. mn
■ -*st sing. 134 4134 Ah. [7.22] 48.
tin 173 2 7tu] 29l3j 30910 3iy 805?
Ah. [56J60 Beh. 59. pin 30'*
31". mn< 817 [911] n3y 281213
3027 68, 1. Ah. 2[6.6]i9[20.2i j
88.97. 161. 164. tiiT [204] 32s
347 67,12. 702 Ah. no [205].
nmn 3rd fem. n3. ''inn id. Ah.
100. ninn 2nd sing. Ah. 149
Bel). 50.55. nifiN 117. pirv
2 77 71". ii,t [Ah. 11 J. linn
38s. tin imperat. 303 313.
lin 2i°. pin ptcp. ? Ah. 167.
Din them : Dma 3017.
main name of a degel 8- 9-.
Nmn pr. n. 2 27-'.
yenn pr. n. 218-2* [321] 517 618 2 256l80J101
2517.20 291 343 3pl [43M*].
nniN '2 yann (= rf>w\n) 25s.
nutarva '2 yenn 22s.
rimn '2 ycnn rj 21-18-2'- [321].
mar '2 ytnn 2 288.
fonii '2 yon 2 24.
h^ '2 W\T\ 834 [9-2J.
Din* '2 yenn 33* 34s.
Dn:o '2 yssnn 2271.
Din j '2 yenn 34s.
pro '2 ytnn 33s 22".
•had '2 ytjnn 2 2G1.
m:nua 'a ynn 617.
iT^a '2 ytnn 830 917.
rnjn '3 ytmn 833 921.
nwin pr. n. 5ly 184 401 4613.
nmx '2 nw>n 2 s2.
n^jn '2 ntymn 2 27.
in: '2 nwin 405.
nojn 'a nwin '2 [jn: 'a .Tyjsjnn
2 27.
a 84
INDEX
met '3 nwn 5213.
»n 5' 826 99 15"" 1 8» Ah. [45]57-
95.95.98.103.118.
vn pi. n. Beh. 4.
xbyn Ah. 9.17.23.44.
&»n Ah. 41.
niltiDVl see |DK.
T^H: inn 3rd fut. fem. 152528. 2ncj
fut. 711322 Ah. 102. "px 822.
\)2r\> io19. "j^ne Ah. 40. >i»i> ?
54". -ins^n? Beh. 52.
on = Din 183.
wtfion 2 64[5j2S.
10n 971013 io15 264 69 B. [Ah. 169]
Beh. 60; as object 135 1535 2813
309 42610-1012 546 7 113 Ah. 154.
162 [Beh. 8].
JTJIDn 271 305.
njDPI 432.
in if: r2131 c7813 710 820'26 98-10-13
I06-7-H-15 IX7 r^8 jg[29]33-S5 j g3 2012
2rl2 2*7-8tl9-2l]22 2892Q63023'27^I22'26
337 [356'11] 421'5'7'8-10-11 457 544'11
66, 16 Ah. 82.82.103.115.123.
1 24. 1 24 [128. 1 30] i49[i6o]i7i.
192 [Beh. 58]; that? [74]; see
also p?.
fan if: 378 [38>o] Ah. 35[66]8i.
taxasn 439.
nvun 43'1.
r&nan 26517.
rwi 134. n:n (verb?) 2 77.
W: W1B 8 144.
i?1Vn pr. n. 2 226-2930-129 393.
■Win nna i>ran 22112.
nna? 'a bwi 25s.
bwn 'a *ap) 'a bwi 2230.
n^ycc '3 bwi 2 22C.
Ti^nn pr. n. 8i5686.
^nnnn pi. n. Beh. [3?]39[46.49].
"1 and, passim.
HDX1 42s.
Ami = JUTP1 2 54.
D^Dini pr. n. Beh. 7.8[8jio.n.
N3m 8i31-32-32.
*n»jnarn pr. n. 26". ^nonsni 2 624.
nnBTIl pr. n. 515.
nm = mv\ Beh. 22*.
«1T1 pr. n. 204 252 27* 30s-6-16
^j5.6.15 ^a6 38s-4.
mn = mn Beh. 40.
n:vi pr. n. [Beh. 38-40.46].
mri pr. n. Beh. [22.27.29.30.32]
34[37]-
maD^i '3 nnsnn [Beh. 61].
mSDI pr. n. [Beh. 61].
n31 pr. n. 2240.
"ISJ1 pr. n. 2436 66, 10.
Tin '3 Til 2415.
nmi name of a degel: 52-3 64-10 132
143 153 [282].
W1 pr. n. [161?] 22133 [541].
nonj '3 »nB>i 22134.
}fc>CJ>1 pr. n.? 6913.
|nBM pr. n. 1413.
XT this (fem.) 213 3017 42' 71" 806
8 1 39.112
H3r pr. n. 65, 7.
INDEX
.TT3T pr. n. 2 2lst1141 5216 8i5
. . . D^T pr. n. 242.
rl2
JMT pr. n. 51-.
pr buy : pr 42s 7 1 '■> ? pi (imperat.)
42s. Pa. sell pi 4211. 133?
42s. pntn 2 5n-14. ruaris 90.
101T pr. n. 2 2134 (or 1131?).
anr (= am) 3028 394 Ah. 193.
Kant 3012 3111.
nnr : w [Ah. 163]. nrvttN
IHTN Beh. 51.
s
&,T? 8:
33
imperat. 21
if It gjtl9l22.27.44.124_
n^r 55. nmt 5*.
Sf : lhf imperat. 38s
••ON pr. n. 82s.
pr io10-17.
Till pr. n. 2415.
n (relative) i3-3-c-G g*-i*M-*> 44-8 54.4.5.
10.10.12-14.20.20 62.3.5.8.14.16.22 g9.ll. 13. 17.19.
23t35] q[2]3.10.12 j j 3.4.6.7.9.10.11", j tS.4.6.9.
10.12112] j ,6.8.14 j r 19.24.25.27.29.32 207-14-
15.19 2 f*7.8.U.U.14.14.16.20 2 g3. 5.7.7.9.10. 12.
12.13 0q1. 3. 5-7.9-11. 12.16-18. 24. 27.28. 30 oj7.
23
S
9.23.26.27.29 q24.6.10 q36 &C. nT3 30
*ia 61-7 824-23 134 2 72 281
37
402 ; see also ~3.
ooio Ah. 52. 68 [75].
;7.12.
3°25 32'
1 gg.19 j^stiel 2O14 25° 287
^27 ^T 54 65-7 83-25 93
>T JO
n ny 30
138 28« 4310 44fi 8i7-32-"9 Ah. 48
[57361.63 Beh. [3M29. 32.41.
43]- 1^» 53-4-6-11-12 6'5 [7yJ 93
2810 404. *aV» 17 812. o^n
819. n^T 510 820 Ah. [90] 1 44.
D3^T 2014 25s-16 54
172.
12.
285
>J
[?»? 3lS 2O10[131 3020.
8 132-38.
n (genitive particle) 2°-6 &c. 318 f>2-2
6" &c.
in 373-
pT: D1.TJT 318.
IT = i?V 57-
IT this : 54-6-10.12.14 67.7.12-14.16 gu.is.ie.
16.19.24.25.27.27 q4. 5.8. 12.14 jq7.9.13.15 2 Cj8-
11.16 26[4]22 27r,rsls[11' 287-in-u qo0-9-10-
12-14.16.17.22.23.27 t j-6-10.12.13.15.1C.20.21.2C
326-10&c. "|T3 hereupon : 38s.
,-jj r4.6 302i# D3f 92 204 ^ 3_
*]^K 164 208 27s 3011 3110 7 115 Ah.
[39]56-58.67[69] Beh. 20. »3^N
1^6.8 j^,
TI3T pr. n. io3-24 1538 2 23-'*-107 2312
42s 4612 481 63s-8 68, 2. 8i22-23.
hwin 'a -113? 2018.
nox 'a niai 133.
tdj 'a rwwi 'a mar 22s.
max 'a mar 832 920.
nta 'a mar 1320.
S3T (= "ai) innocent : Ah. 46[6i].
DDT that very, the same; 92 204
65.3-
-iar remember: -pr [Ah. 64].
»«3P Ah. 53. "\21V [2719].
p3T memorandum: 321-2 611-10
62, 1. 6310-'2-14 68, 11.
KH3T pr. n. 2 2cc-67.
nn3T pr. n. 55 1115 2310-16 25s 5210
553-
nH3T 'a nnar 5215.
d^c'd 'a mar 830 918.
2«6~
INDEX
;ro '2 mar 87-29 9>7.
yibr 1513 36<-
ft P '73-
H3T 21'-'110-" ■a'1'10' rln 617 89-18,22-28 n14-10
I q-. 12. 1 I.I I. l.-..li'..l'.'.20.20 j 1 16 1 q.-..7.l2.17
j^T.ll j -4.31I37J j82.4 2O9.10.1C 221
26l.l]9.21. 23 2 73-10 283-'"'-7-15 2Q4-C-C
3O17.20.28.30 3117.19(20] ^2 &c# -JJQ
[27s11] 284-6 3016 378. "jjr 8* 9''.
n"?N 213 710 i313 182 20" [2 19]
2813 [Ah. 1.62] Beh. 59. rb$2
[Ah. 26.29].
pyi 71".
nyr 72s? nnnyn Ah. to6. Tyr
Ah. 101,1 14.145 Beh. 24. NTyr
[Beh. 30.45]. siyr8i41. ;Tyr
377-
Nnmyr Ah. 105.
mai pr. n. 8 1105.
nn2T pr. n. 24s.
noiT pr. n. 22134 (or lOTf).
T*m 2 6[fll!7. K3»3*iJ 2621.
y-ir 1 38. ny-i? Ah. 85. jynr 68, 5.
PIT: N»P"1TD 3012 3111.
mr 36s.
nr = ns%r? nra 183.
n abbreviation for? 1515 243841.
K3n: N3nn (3rd sing.) [Ah. 134].
ban 3014 [Ah. 27]. -]ban Ah. 44.
ban^Ah. 36. bnno 272:i,-,3!.
i^an? 37".
Un pr. n. i2' 2 2C3-99 281C 333 4215
6 12 8i15-24-25 [822].
nsa 'a "An 53s.
D1DH ('3) un 8 110,
xmn '3 vm 2 272.
htfn '3 vin 2 229-30.
rTOP '3 un 198.
K3»t3 '3 Vin 2 2';| 2313.
iTnuao '3 ^n 22135.
Din: '3 un 34''.
pro 'a vm 121.
rpbtta '3 un 186.
n*j»p 'a un 24s.
in one: ioc i52» 26(lllu-12-17-19-20
2f 29',3)5.c 37s Q38»] 614 772 8149
Ah[33]38[6lJx9i-204Beh. [22J
38. ^x nn 303. nna in 107.
nnb 2428-30 26,4-1,;•,8-20. mn 1528
276.17 qo19-29 o 1 18.28 0-712 jj5 >7q2
mna 28s.
nn: nnn 1st sing. 412. mff
Ah. 106. mn ptcp. 303 313 702.
mn: 8,G 1312 157.9.M 36i. nmn
362-3. fmn 2610-14.
am .• airo 215. na*n ptcp. fem. 183.
Din is25-28.
iy,n Pa. Win (showed us) 3115.
nmn 2nd pers. Ah. 96. [N^iim*
347. »row*? Ah. 102. i)n:
2 67. Ha. pmn (showed us)
3016; (we showed) 2 67. nm.T
691 Ah. 93. •■mnn [Ah. 208].
Tin pr. n. 23s 24s (?) 384-G-8-8.
n^aDN '3 nm 537.
fbijr '3 nm 2416.
tntna 'a Tin? 2 413.
mn pr. n. 23° 3713.15,
n:i '3 mn 2240.
INDEX
287
'did 'a omo 'a [nlin 2 27;|.
b^B> 'a nin 2 28r>.
nn Ah. 94. Mm [Ah. 40.41].
n^n 1st pers. Ah. 14. prn 3017
3 11". nm"1 [Ah. 163]. nrnn
68, 3. mriK Ah. 205. pTn*»
[Ah. 63]. nn imperat. 3023
3123 41° Ah. 101 Beh. 54. im
38s. nmptcp. Ah. 125. mnob
Ah. 37.63.108. nnrv [2 19].
nrnne Ah. 106. >rno 1511.
NOn sin : Ah. 128 ? "pson Ah. 50.
XUn arrow: "jon Ah. 126.128.
nun [Ah. 191].
Don 157.
nun wheat? 67, 13.
-ion Ah. 81. pon 69s.
rvn : w 49s Ah. 86. n*nn (2nd
sing.) [Ah. 82]. »nn [Ah. 55].
Ha. "jrvnn Ah 51. »ynm
Ah. 54. X'n living 702.
pn Beh. i.6.n[i4.2i.30.33.42.
44], p. 266. NTI [Beh. 48].
pn life 303 Ah. 11. s:n 83-8.
N^TI [210] 20521!2U-n 221 2433[39)42-47
252.4 277.20 3Q8 371 [3gl2] go5
Beh.[3]5[7.i3]i3[i5.i9]20*23-
32[37]39-4i[43-45-46], pp. 266,
267. "WIN* ^n Ah. 55.61.
b'n 8o4-n Ah. 137. ^n [Beh.
48J. *£>n 7 113.
DDn Pa. Ah. 1. nnoan ist pers.
Ah. 9 [19]. nonn Ah. 10.
nODPi Ah. 92.169. xnonn Ah.
146. TicDn Ah. 19. -poDn
[Ah. 147]. nnoDn Ah. 94.
onnosn Ah. 94. D'on Ah. 1.
28.35.178. NO^n Ah. 12.42.
^>n? 81"; = 0)i^n 8i« &c.
X^n sand 2 67 Ah. [66] 11 1.
nbn part of a boat 2612-12[l5l2°.
^n: ^nn Ah. 148. Ha. n^n.T
Ah. 188. ,T^n Ah. 131.
bbn: ^nnn Ah. 168.
^n: s\blT 71" Ah. 18.
sj^n in exchange for: i3 910-11 i34fi
448-9 Ah. 5.62.69. ysbn Ah.
21. JD^n 83*.
onriD^n? 2 613.
pbr\ 283-r'-7-9-10-12 82(9h2. ap!>n 283-5.
np^n 2814. pbn 827[101.
n^n pr. n. 5217.
-i^n : p^n ior-B ii2-4 1514 363-4'4 8120.
DPI? i52s-28.
son [Ah. 32]. snon Ah. 140.
jon pr. n. 59.
Don Ah. 140.
pen : nson (2nd sing.) 453141.
ncn was angry: 69 E? Ah. 47.
"ion wrath Ah. 104.
iron ass : 44s Ah. 90. Kion Ah.
9i[iio]no. pnon 8129. pen
54r>-" 68, 11. jxnon 81".
-It^n wine: 3021 3120 722-4-10-17 Si"'''.''
Ah. 79[i89]. Nion 8 139 Ah.
92.93209.
"pen leavened : 217.
neon 26"-1*-16-11 65, 7.
81s3. jeon 2 614-15.
p Ah. 132.
neon
2 88
INDEX
3l3n god-name 27s-8 30"'.
man god-name 1315 34s? 3H7.
ot: ;an 492. |twn 8i*-*-**-***«-
,M-WB. NnDJnAh. 129. KD3PI
8i28.
,T3n pr. n. 8i»-37-127.
■Jjn: H3Jn Ah. 115.
loan pr. n. 53'.
N'osn? 752.
pn 26"-" 62, 1 ? tfaan 2619.
Wi '3 pn 28™ 6 1 2.
nnry '2 pn 62, 1.
c;na '3 pn 23*.
^3n pr. n. 23.
rwan pr. n. 2 12-11 227 387-R.
SDNUD '3 DJn 74n.
nan Ah. 83.
pon? 68, 10.
pn : Ha. jDnn 207. pnnj 2814.
vuDnn imperat. 82n. nrmonn
447[65.3]- ionno 7282 162.
[p]ono 805. ponno [3s] 26s
[338]. snon 2711. pra
^5.6.8[9l_ pDn 2613 Ah. 79.IO5.
TWDn Ah. 159.
non : n-)Dnptcp. 2 77. pon 3s9-10.
■von [Ah. 131].
Bnan? 2618-20.
ir2"Qn pr. n. 73lfi.
;vn 1516. J»n 200.
abpn [i62-4].
Kin Beh. 34[35-47]. pn "13 Ah.
217. nn 3019 3118.
3in 7113 Ah. 113. »annaAh. 174.
rnnn 804.
pin pr. n. 17*.
*»nn 62. wonn 823.
tanH3»-in god-name 77.
;onn pr. n. 22*.
y^is '3 join 122.
«rw '3 putava '3 jnaonn 184.
-sinn pr. n. 38*.
tjnn deaf Ah. 216.
(crna n) xt^nn 8i373s.
pcnn pr. n. 6"-M 86-28.
p-j'n 8i'.
WW&n Xerxes 51 64, 20, 29.
&*WT\ Xerxes 21.
■jCn restrain: Ha. "|Cnnn Ah. 81.
"|BTl : K31BTI darkness Ah. 125.
Iinnn month Athyr 281.
fWin? 3710-
Dnn : IDnn imperat. 219. Dnin 761.
n3D pi. n. ? 8 145 82s.
N'OB gazelle : Ah. 1 20.
n3D month Tebeth: 2628[Beh. 42].
KHH3 Ah. 6 2 [69].
3t3: 33^ TD 29 145 15'° 20° 43'
67, 5. 33^5 3D 155. nTU Ah.
67. 30 2 213;i2 7I9-2lt22l30233i22
Ah. 86.io9.ii5[i23]i52[i57]
159.163-5. n3ta Ah. 57
123. «n3D Ah. 9.24.42
■jnao 3024 31
2.",
}3D Ah. 14
H3-i57[i57]- 131U?Beh. 55
^d : bbm 38s. nJ&a p. 265, 4
n i"6t33 Beh. [2]5.i3[2o]28[4i
43], pp. 267, 269. &DD 30"
3 110. "]^B 7 115.
INDEX
289
1DXDU? 8l40.
fDB 2616.
rriDCD pr. n. 2 283.
Dya verb: noyD 1st sing. Ah. 105.
^njoyta* Ah. [86J209. DJJU noun
26" 347. Dyt3 D*B> 2622-23-25 2721.
xroya [Ah. 105]. -py& 4i7-
;yo : naya ist sing. Ah. m. uyu
[454]- TWVB 6<5- *najyo' Ah.
91. pyo Ah. 91. Pe'il
n^yo 1 st sing. 824.
JH3 2610-18.
[l^sno Ah. 97.
iWW pr. n. 37".
"IN1 pr. n. 2289 394 [405].
mm* '2 wtv 128 185.
n^i:s '3 [b>]w 1313.
•T3t[K'] pr. n. 5216.
rrpbn '3 rwro* 5217.
rvaat? '3 row 52".
... 'a .tbw 52s.
171. HT3 I56.7.25.28 8l2«-»8. 'T ?
Ah. 155. \V (our hand) 23[9lls
34(141. MT 389> pi ((iuai)
158: for p 15215. YTn[4 23]
Ah. 123. »T3 Ah. 122.
NW pr. n. I42.
mW '3 KW 345.
iTOT pr. n. 63 82-31-35 92-19 n14 13s-21
2I2.n 22" 25s-18 301422 3 1 til* 37>
38112 65,2. 76s 8 134. rtny 52.
xrw '3 mnDN '2 ro*r 2o3-8-ut201.
nnDA 'a ror 22121 331 34s (not).
yB>in '3 nw 2 s17-20.
nniK '3 nwn '3 w 2 s2-9-12.
irono '3 ro*i» 8S1 9s0.
D^tro '3 roT 2518.
jnJ '3 iTJT 25s-8-12-21 282-3-6-15-17.
-nay 'a .tot 22108.
PT 3030 3l29- VTK? Ah- 2I°-
ynn 3rd fem. Ah. 187. yT
ptcp. Ah. Ii6.n6[i63]i77.2i7.
Ha. jyTin 1 st plur. 3029. jnin
imperat. Beh. 52. yTJV [2710].
3' Elephantine: [21 3s] 63-3-4 71-2 82 iT particle of address. Ah. 127.129.
io2-3 201-2 251-2273-5-8-11 28115 291 ! 3.T 825[331 133 221 24s9 257 371213
OQl. 5-7.8.13.22.25 qi?. 12. 22. 24 o24 3 56'9
34635243[ll265,6?6656.68[2]4.
bl* : in!>3* ist sing. Ah. 48. ^33
29. 1:^3 imperat. Ah. 52[7i].
^310^ 213. i6aiO Ah. [90].
SnA' pr. n. 618 834 [9"] 2 292.
T: T3 22120 24s6 267 384 444 8i14-
28.29.31_ *l^y 2621. "]T3 IO12-14-19-20
4213 Ah. 193. »ara 818-22 437.
ny 284-«. DT3 8 132"35-37 Ah.
2599
4210 448lsl [46s-11] 552-6 6316 [Ah.
74]. nan"1 ? 403. nam 3rd
fem. 134. JT3.T 2nd sing. 23[9-12)
314 53 io3 Ah. 170. TQiV
[434]. ^nnan" 437. nan* ist
sing. 83-13-20 93-14 132-5.6.9.12 Ig4 X8»
296 357 433-sl5]6 457 473-8 6912 Ah.
169. nnarv 88-25 i34™6. u.t
13 2 74 3 15 8 139-111. p-T ils
374. ruan* i8 17*. an imperat.
u
290
INDEX
nan 3-9* 42s
42s-11. »an 8».
\nan 1316. tan 38°. aw 173
2jisa.33.36.42 6010 73'418. a^n =
3*iT? 72*. NT.T 68, 6. Ah. 22.
anvv 2618-21-21. aimo? 72'.
nn» = t.T 1 314.
DDl^C? ma TISTliT I2.
mnn^ pr. n. ii18.
1.T Ya'u 64-6-11 221-1'23 25s 2716
o()6.15.!4,J«.27 qj7.24.25 qq8 q8] 4^[3j4
562.
"IIKliT pr. n. 2816.
Iin*1 Judaea 301 3i[lh8.
nw pr. n. 8i78-96-132.
W 6s-9-10 82 [92] io3 43[lJ. JOTliT
2|2U)ll 22i [2720]. fTliT 202-3.
Nni;T 3o19-22-26 3i22-26 3812 4212.
bin ma jmm 22s2.
.t^ha rna jrnn* 2 2101.
I^d ma frv.rp io2-21-23 iS1-4?
pmn^ pr. n. 3018 31".
7OI1T pr n. 22" 234.
rbo'1 rna ^Dirv 22103.
yDtPW pr. n. 22126 392 6$6 68, 10.
|TUOT pr. n. 186.
iT:»y ma ^jn.T 22105.
•na? 'a xrann rna potem* 22s8.
un ma posw 22".
D^D-rna yoBnn* 22 s7.
jna rna yoenn* 22s4.
PP ma jjd^.t 22117.
pun* pr. n. 221.
IV 284-5.
DV i1-4 51-6-8 [61] 81-18-20-26 91-8-13 io1
jj3.10 jql j.l j c-Illl7.20.22.26.28 jl5-5
[7.7.8)8 24^33-s-«'34 2ci 281 3021 372-,t
r431]457? 6112 7218 76s Ah. 168:
for »8y 3 112. ndv 89 147 154
2o9-10 22120 287 3020 3119 [35"]
434[81 [67. 6]- VW [2i6-«-9l
7i4[24] Ah. [14j39.49.52. %V
3013 [66, 6 J. ynv Ah. 102
Beh. 58. NVDV 2 19.
KW pr. n. 8 196-104.
frw pr. n. 8i14[28j29.
Ji": wno 1524.
rpiis 'a jn 8« 2517.
fP3P pr. n. 1538 198 66, 10.
nnis* 'a rw 69 92 1538? 254-13'20.
nfyob 'a n»3T 2519.
B|P: *|?n 2nd sing. Ah. 130.130.
5)T imperat. Ah. 129. KnDT a
loan: Ah. [1 11] 130.130. j 31
[131]. hdt 103.
ma . . '2 wrp 8 128.
D[fe] rna b»n» 22s7.
enx* 'a ^d ma hero 22s9.
prr pr. n. 8 18.
nin 'a pn* 8 12«.
ata* : Ha. *aab naBin 2nd sing. 6".
pal? Dna^in 208.
d^pd ma «h3* 344.
ba* see bna.
n^ : lbr\ 3rd fern. 1533.
NO' swear 44s. !"6nND* 1st sing.
824. rMXCf 2nd sing. 6[4)8-n.
V1KD* I45-8- ND1d!> 66. nSDIC
oath 6' I44-6-9 [441 454]. NE1E
8a
PJDID 59.
S'Q* sea: 7r20 Ah. 117.208.
INDEX
291
}0* right hand : 284-6.
nny = rrrr 52.
N'^ pr. n.? 8i65-6C-71-73-75-80-81-93-97'101'.
P? : PJ1C& Ah. 120. Hiphil?
TOpW Ah.' 92^3]. R*p3»
children : 403.
DTtD'1 pr. n. 8i84-92.
n^D* pr. n. 22103 343.
b"nx '2 i-6d> 2519 292.
jn: '2 n^D* 56*.
fjD1 : Ha. ejDin* [Ah. 144]. pBDW
2618. HfiDin imperat. ? 2617.
no' : Ithp. -idjv Ah. 80?
HV- NJ?1D west: 84 1314 66,15.
b>ob> Kjno 86. pep nyio 25s.
t?ce> wb 68.
|Sy» pr. n. 2416.
&JP: Dy» advisor Ah. [2]i2[i8.2o.
27.36]. noy advice: Ah. 57.
NDDy Ah. 42.57.[66j. TiDy
Ah. [3-i9]53. nnoy Ah. 28.
43-55-6°[64]-
yvs : pyW Ah. 168.
Tp»: mp* ptcp. Ah. 103.
"jp^ : Ha. "ipin imperat. Ah. 98.
rnpin 2nd sing. Ah. 176. •yp*
Ah. 93.108.1n. m*p» Ah. 95.
Kn*vp Ah. 130.
DbpiT Jerusalem : 3018.
m'» J1 2' io1-5-6 ii4-8 131 151 201
[2 14-5] .2121 24s4 291-5 304-19 6316
65,5, i3-67,8.721[781]Beh.32.
m*a n*v n4 173. m^ rrv
ii9. sm* 1 13-4 296. jrw 458-
prvr 8i".
yT ? iyT Ah. 43.
n-p ; n:riT 3rd fat. 1 521. wvz
8329.
3P»? pr. n. 81".
7V2W pr. n. 72 2 2B1-59 381.
no la '2 rv3E» 22130.
2W pr. n. 22".
3»B" pr. n. ? 8i9-109.
DP*? pr. n. 83".
n»yB« pr. n. 516 833 921.
IB" 82 12. Ha. TnPin 2nd fem.
39s-
37V 62 Beh. 22. 3n imperat. 9*.
3Din visitor: Ah. 112.
Din1' pr. n. 123 334 34s.
mmn '3 mrp 2223.
rroiiv pr. n. i2 67, 3.
NOJV pr. n. ii1.
NJTV pr. n. 571.
in1 : TW 303 [70*]. miv adverb ?
Ah. 96.
3 = tjn3 36 b 6311? 8i61.
3 = ejD3 2221-30-33-37-39 &c.
-3 adverb, passim. M3 61-7 8-
1 82 T2 i10l 26[l]22-23,25 272,7 ao4*13-1!
3,4 338 339 3713 388.6 402 4,<
426.10-12 4g4 7I19 Ah. [2.7.I3]l4
[2iJ30.36[4i.47]62[76.77]97
[131J163.198.201. njrs 2713
3015 378 and see it:;. "»rD 10"
and see in. pn3 75-6-8193 and
see jDn. N^oys 402. ?ys 9s
182 27s 30s-4-22 3121 377 38s 41s
42s.io 8o6-7 827 Ah. 51. jys iy
u 2
292
INDEX
.]87. nays 46 [i68] 372-
PB»J?3 1 6ft-8-9 and see pvy. ny3
173 21* 26'" 313 38s [421] 54"
65,4. 76s [Ah. 16]. ny3i 172
2 13 [2719] 39s 561. DS3 515
517 8*8 916 IO« 184 43[6hl [45s
4615] and see DD.
X3 8i61-M-"-8B-m pi. |R3 8 1106.
,TND reproof [Ah. 83].
rt33 : nnan 2nd sing. Ah. 100.
xbn 3016. "nto 3 115.
733 Ah. 166. "p3 Ah. 165.
133: T33 Ah. 136.147.
xrv-133 26". naa 2617.
"'23 ptcp. Ah. 92.152.
sm 3713.
313 : 31D^ Beh. 50.51. 313 ptcp.
817. K313 Ah. 133. J313
Beh. 51. 313» Ah. 134.
Nnm3 [Ah. 30] Beh. 56. nmj
Ah. 132. nn3*i3 Ah. 133.
TO pr. n. 220 [3"].
bm: bny 58 435. fa* 15 1311.
TTon 2nd sing. Ah. 81. 3rd
sing. [181]. brON 56-11 612 [710]
147 259-10 287 434-8 Ah. 17.
!?3N IO11-12 138 1531.35 4y7.8
Ah. 26. pkro* 815 2ou-u.
fiba* io18. ^rna 20'° 2510
$>3J I4.
fi13 : N3iT3 3018 8l8-3». N^n3 30118
[311] 38^2.
r« 25'.
'TOtt [Ah. 116].
N'nn thus: Ah. 20.
'3 Ah. [27J95.98.99tx03J114.119.
I22.x^3.i32[i32]i38[i43]i68.
178.208.
1^3DN '3 ^3 pr. n. 219.
*3»a 71*.
^^3 month-name 7218.
p33 = p3:3 509 83"
^3 2B[6.1S.16l o« 6516 jo9-1017 II6-7 I210
I44-11 I £13.19.24.27 j ^2.2.6 202-5-16-19-20
2 17 2 25-19-31 2427-31 25821 268-16 2 82
1Q2.3.14.16.16.17.2!. 26.27 qj2.3-15.26 1,5
35n 35 d 37" [3«2] 391"1 4o13
4x1[421-44310] 45a-84615 4§2 49'
56!582? 65, 4.67, 7.68,3,11,12.
732-6-17 755-9 785-6 82s 8330 Ah.
[36]83.96-98.i27.i27[i32]i67.
N^3 26'5'13-17 oo11-12-12-29-30 qiiO.15.16.
22.26.29 4Ii Ah. 43[56]6i. ^3
[Ah. 1 66]. rfa 1520 Ah. [2]
i2[i8.28]55. fpW>3 393.
N^3 restrain: "jn^3 57-13. 1^3
3715. *6y 59-10. V^blX 56-
|^3 ptcp. 3714. »mS>3 ? 371S.
K"3^3 3016 3 115.
n^3^3 see i>3.
no3 1315. «n»3 2 73-8[ul 306.
?3 2I4'10' 262-3tel9-22 ["2 7121 qo4-22,27
3i22-2«33737338669, 3. 69B. 7119
761 807 Ah. [i3-37]52[75-77]89-
99. 116. 145 Beh. [7. 12. 16. 17. 22.
34]37[48-5°-59]- P^D 207
4 14. p-aiby 403. p by
Ah. 117. 187.
Vl3i3 Cambyses 3013 32s 66, 1.
THJS pi. n. Beh. 12.
INDEX
1133?? 4211.
"•DUO pr. n. 26921 507.
"1333 2617. 1*1333 3028 31".
p33 509 83".
"133: '233 Ah. 171.
C'33: W33J1N Beh. 1.4. 8. 10, p. 269.
prwarp 718. wan' [71*]-
KJ133: rW33 Ah. 90.163. DfinM
177. nni33 66 171-1-5-6 2i2-"
26ll.4)8 301.4.18.22 [3^] 6913 762.
Ah, 56.67.
jma spelt io10.
D3 cup: 6i414. JD3 1512. pD3
6i1313.
."ID3 hide Ah. 109. nD3]"l 2nd
sing, Ah. 103. "33D3N Ah. 118.
PD3D' 3811.
vD3 month-name : 61 81 [91] io1
131 251 [Beh. 20].
P1D3 i7 215-15 317 ^7-7 614-16 814-14-21-21
q16.15 jq3.5.5.9.23 jjl-3.7 j q5.6.11
I J.3-10 I r5-8.10-l».J3.2i.31.34.36 2012.15.16
22i.i.2 &c. 2515-15 274 2810 29s-3
3012.28 3I5.27 [3313 346] 353^9.9
362"4 36 b 3712 422"4-7 433-3-6t"i
449.946l9.10] 473 492 fo4.13.14 ^2,1.
63J 65> 7- 783'5-6 8 130-30. Pins RD3
57 [42s]. NDD3 510-13 io14"16
15" 182 22120 294-6 3111 354-7 42°
43(5.6]8-10 4g2 65,1,14.67,16.
-J3D3 io7-11-12-18 II4-8-8 [424].
'3SD3 359ll0-10]. HSD3 7 130.
'DD3 i318-19.
J1D3: *]J1D3 Ah. 205.
DJ1D3 pr. n. 8 188.
'D33 ?*\
293
T&3
DID Ah, 189.
«p hand: 1528.
Ah. 103.
f)3 bowl 364 ; plur. JB3 15".
|D3 hunger Ah. 188.
1D3 3714.
HDV3 Ah. 101.
"1V3: Ha. imperat. 1V3H Ah. 127.
*V¥3 Ah. 127.
N13 see N13.
r6ma 5511. fcns 572.
TO: N'313 26[lj3t7]8.
D~13: ^1313 Ah. 40.
ND13 : NNDT3 Ah. 133. HND13 6V.
BH3 Cyrus [Beh. 23].
Una 10 shekels. 156 2015 25"
293.5.6 422 433 g53 786. ftP-D
17 215 57 614 814-21 915 13611 1410
j (-8. 14.31. 34. 36 2015 2 2122-124-125 2^16-15
2614.14.17.17 28H oa7 422-3'41 4q6[nl
473[469]65,7, 10. 66,8. 68, 5.
8-flT.llfl,
'B*3 pr. n. 534.
my '3 W3 23s.
NB»B*3 Ah. 158.
3J"I3 " 218-22 q20-21 c55-20 616-22 823-26-27
q16 JO20 II16 Io3l6)l6.17 j jll. 14 j r 37
l83 2016-19 2517-20 2623-25 2814-17
424-» [43u-459 4615] 502 59 66,
14. nuns (3rd fern.) ioM
[4313] 68, 4 rev. 811. n3r,3
(1st sing.) 9414 i39-12 [436J-
nnans 817 [1312]. 3D3n (2nd
sing.) II6. 31133 2814. 3'J13
j"2n] 5W.I8 I0s I?3 358 [4310.10]
594
INE
•na 2n-,s 182 25s
nnna (his coat)
48* 66, 2.
T66, i].
pna 428-9-13.
Ah. 41.
i?na? pr. n. 2 29.
jna 205 26M 42'°. xana 2620.
"ina: nnao Beh. 6.1 r.
btd: nena 2nd sing. 7s. 1st
sing. 79.
~7 maiking object of verb, 59 1325
1 53-« &c. wm^ . . . roe>
11 &c. ^ 319 41 53 64 &c.
-jt, 57.13 613.14 &c# for ,3l, I316<
"O^ 12.5.6.6 gS.8.1! &C.
r*
•9.10
69-10-11 &c.
]b i3 272 &c.
-> -10.11.14.15
rb fem. 18s.
nib 2o12-14
387-7 Ah. 57.
Pb 347 3714-
pb 37s: =
ba»5 827 827
Dr6 424 &c.
m»!> II i1 &c.
p h?? [Ah. 122}
i6]}b Ah. 114.
and see ?ap.
N$> i4-5 &c.
nvb 461.
Xlb lion Ah. 117.
33!? Ah. 65.98.163. 33^ a*o
67, 5. H2lb Ah. 104.137.
■•aai? 403 Ah. 169. ••aa^ a'u
14' 1515 437. ^ naom 612.
-pab Ah. 82.106. -jaa^ ao
155. naai> Ah. [2 5] 109. 159.
na^? 7ie. pa? a»ta 29 209.
pai> onauin 208. Dnaa!? Ah.
162.
pa!> n *a [2"] 318 109.
rutt$ [27"] 3021 3121 3311. xroia^
302s 329.
B»a^: ptcp. jeaS> 3o,5-2° 3114. pa£
garment i57-10. ")IP32 68,3
Ah. 171. Wlb 205. BM3^
garment 144.
ina^ 4 14. oanab 3711.
xb 8i70-79. ]xb 8i62-63-66-66 &c.
]nb -but 8'1 96-7-9 27" 3311 34* 37**
82s? [Ah. 9 7 J. except 1312
I532.32.3s Ah. 107.120.154.212?
"6, only in )b |n Ah. 81.
"131? 2613-13-17.
n^: m^ Ah. 164.
mb 793-4.
*aj» 'a »m? i413.
m?: pm^ Ah. i5i[i5i].
Dnm?? 177.
»r»?: pr6* Ah. 124. kt6 the
accursed 307 316 32s, pi. 176?
rFR? a curse Ah. 124. KlVn?
Ah. i34[i98]. Wn^ Ah. 139.
r\rh wicked Ah. I30.i38[i63.
i64J200.
Dn? 572 7itl18 Ah. 33[72]86.i89.
wn? 639-12.
Bt6 7 123.
<hb pr. n. 2813.
D^ io11-13 172 262[3)21 [27=3] 305
[3l5] 322 [448] Ah. 2 3.13.20.
26.39-45-54-57[58]6o[7o.uoJ
165 Beh. 39.
nvb Ah. 36[io4]i I9.i26[i73]20i.
D?12Qb pr. n. 8 187.
INDEX
295
Tnyi>? 8i109. pnyi>o 81110.
bj^ = e£« [24s8-"1 &c.J 3028 509 6 I17
73s 78* Beh. 3.9[ii]n.i4[2i]
21.42.
npb 206 [Ah. 98 ? ptcp.]. nnp^>
(2nd sing.) 76 10". nnpb (1st)
7J 164 [Ah. 8J. inpb 2718 3012
34«. np^ Ah. [143] 1 72.
jnp^n 2nd sing. Ah. 1 1 9. romp*
67, 18. THVpb Beh. p. 265, 1.
nvbnb 911 io9-17. nnpW 99
48s. npbrv 817.
JB^ Ah. 105. i13B6 Ah. 156.
D= ? 8i106.
a\D = half 8 170-71 &c
PIW0 2614-16-17. NriN» centuria
[211] 311. nNO 28 2 219-20t3l].
nnsD 26-10[10]. priNo 2613-16.
DnniKO 80s.
[NO 65, 1. Ah. 109. J3ND 724.
VXD 205-5.
DKO : DDN» 2nd sing. [Ah. 170].
DNOn [Ah. 136].
nDno mn riD3» 836.
rvri03» pr. n. 2 225 68, 4.
•TDno mn rrntaso 82 93-7.10.12 I42.u
203 25s-7 28s-5-6. See also iTnUSO,
nnsD, rose, mwD.
EttAO [Beh. 60].
IAD: HAD 30" [31"].
.THO Ah. 159.
nD Media Beh. [i2]i2.i2[25J26.
PBHO: MHO 376. NTOHO 17"^
68,6. 7314. NTIHO 167.
*u riJHO 2418b-36 376(181 68, 1 1 r.
HJHD 27s [Ah. 70 Beh. 46].
N^HD 8i*>-«. ni>TD3 8 142.
HD 386-8-9 Ah. 79[i39]i5i, 160.163.
177. 30 HO Ah. 165.
THD skilled, Ah. 1.
ino price of a wife 154. mno
i527-
mo die; JVO 58 62s Ah. [4]2io.
nrro (1st sing.) io14. rno*
i517- mon (3rd fem.) 15=°.
(2nd sing.) Ah. 82. pnic
HID death : NniO
'mo 83-8.
Ah. 174.
Ah. 106.
iron 37s.
NriO : -pNTION Ah. 82. ntOTD
Ah. 83.
Tno month name 24[34-35:44.
nono (= iTDPuo) pr. n. s9-12-™ 836
22n.9i 23h#
niK '3 PIOTO 2 265.
7V3V '3 HDno 59-i2-2« 835-36.
taw '3 none 234.
rpjw '3 hdi-io 516 833 9".
rr-Dno pr. n. 622 829-31 918-20 2 22 [34s]
4 83, and see nDPiD.
xns r3 ninDs '3 rvDno 20s-8-11-20.
iTOT '3 iTDnD 52 63 81-18-28 91-5-16 1 114
I2l.17.17.21 j^2 jg2 203 2g3.7.7.18>
pu '3 rvono 253-8-21 282-5-8-9-15-17,
and see -nriDN '3 rvDno.
WV '3 rVDTO 452.
-ino: nno^ [i4]. pretDPNt'o
r6.8 gl8.20.26 g8.13 j ,-17.20.22.26#
nno 2 282.
2()6
INDEX
NDE 77 io7 358 38s 832. "\\fnt2
2 g3.7.9.)o.i2g »jnbo 2 86. PINBO
146. DNDD (3rd fem.) 412.
jiDo io6. ■•antao i4. io»
371S. 7\CKxb Beh. 8.12.
NOOn (3rd fern.) 427.
rvDne rna rrnDe (= 'oao) 1410.
WD pr. n. 2 264.
na"D pr. n. 2 222.
srae pr. n. 2 313.
ycenrp 'a owd 22126.
po 277 Ah. [72]ii3.i92. MO
6" 88 27s.
"OD pr. n. i11.
^UD = ^3NO 24s5 49*.
D3D 8i»2.
tODD? Ah. 203.
xbn to be full 4 14. vb& 711.
K^onn [Ah. 32]. wbonn (2nd
sing.) 217 io1117. xbnn Ah.
131. t6o fulI828pl. pb»37n.
ni>0 see under ??».
I"6d salt Ah. in.
nbtt sailor 6" 88. Nr^D 2[2) 513.
di-6d (= non^o) Ah. 99.
•jbo king 30" 66,6 Ah. 3-5[8]io.
II-I3-I5[2°-23]32[37jIOO-Ioo
[10 1 ] 103. 104 [104. 105] 107. 108.
Beh. i7[24]5o. Nata i«»^
14.16 TolSl j-l.7g2.15 *1 81-14.21 gl. 15 JO2-4
I 31 I41'10 I Cl-2.5.7. 9.10.15. 35.36 2q1.15
213.3.10 2gl.7.16 [2628] 2 72-3-5 281'11
2gl.5 oq2.4. 5.19.21. 30 oj4.4.19 q27 OK1-6
3?14 43[U3l7J8tl0] [451]46W 64, 18,
29. 65,6. 68,2. 71io-12.1e.17 Ah.
»19
I15.
72.7
[7-9-I5]i5-27[34]47-5o-5i-53-
55.[6o]62[64.65]7i[75]77[78]
Beh. [7.i2.i6.i7.22.34]37[39.
48-50.59], p. 269, 3. WO
3 112. Khiate Ah. 95. w&ho
61.
iTabo pr. n. 831 9
n*3B* 'a iTa^o 7
»tunn 'a oirv 'a roha 22".
\h& 692. ^D> 69"? ^DD
Ah. 100.178. ni?D 3716 38«-G
404 Ah. 93[96]98. 1 09. -jfe n^O
Ah. 100.104. Nn^D [Ah. 22J.
pbo 379- f$>» Ah. [26]29.92.
»Jd [Ah. 1]. $D Ah. 4
♦mte Ah. [2. 28] 43.60. 114.
Dn»?D 4213. N^O 3029 3 128 71".
}D pronoun Ah. [6.6]94? 107. 139.
140. 140.161. >r |D 89-19 13816
2014 259 287-12 37*.
|D preposition 55-5 615 7s-9 84-4-9 9'-9-i2
I l6.6 jo8 IJ.6-1! J r4. 18. 21.25.28-30.35
l62[el 20s-6-9-10-15 2I3-5[8-8) 254-13-16
261.27 2^5.9[ll]20 2 87.11.11 2g3 3q3.6.13.
16.19.21.28 OJ6.12.15120127 o ?i o87-8-n 4 I5
434,7M8.8.10] j-468j 471 482 [^5410
66, 6], n, 15.67, 5.8i8-«>-» 833
Ah. 33-46.79-8i[8i]9o[9i]98-
101.105.1n.112.122-f124J.128.
^o-^S-1 40-144-189 [189] 197.
2I0.2II.2I7[2I7]223. Beh.[l2]
51. -JD io13 266 [4212 453-"]
Ah. H9[i39]i94. «po 9».ii
209 28"302467,5. Ah. 128.136.
INDEX
297
142. 143. 146.
43
4(8)
^330 819 146
H30 68 13716 1536 4 17
Ah. 49.114. J30 66, 1. 68, 1.
Ah. 121. D3JD 25* 386 66, n.
DH30 510. JH30 164. »T JO
4(4)8 4 !? Ah. 86. J330 therefore
207 4 14. by30 25s 358 4310110)
[66,1]. vbvm [213-17J 320
Dip |B 54H.
♦rmrw }0 Ah.
5io.is 256 482.
jo*ip jo 32B.
210.
XHJO Ah. 53.
oymo 2 17 272i121 3014 [3ils] Ah.
101 Beh. [6]n. Dy*lO 493-4.
Nnoymo 27" 30123in[Ah. 10].
■DO mina: J30 2617. pj» 29s.
nmo [2714] 3021 3 121 3311. snmo
3025 32s.
Dn:o pr. n. 2 220-71 392.
i?wo '2 nix '2 nmo 22™.
bvu 'a Dmo 2017.
my3 'a h*u '3 Dmo 2518 2815.
rryqp '3 Svn '3 nmo 2 226.
IDT '3 Dmo 15s8.
Nn3T '3 Dmo 2 267.
DD^tP '3 D^O '3 DmO 202-9-16-19.
cbw '3 Dmo 197.
jno r3 Dmo 2 262 2311.
nnry '3 Dmo 2017.
''DID '3 DmO 127 2 278-79.
vbv '2 Dmo 2518 352-6 441 6310.
Deih? '2 Dmo (='c '3 d^btd) 20
nomo pr. n. 2 295.
nnDx 13 [,»33]y ni3 nomo 2281
<n:y '3 mar n-13 nomo 22108.
19
♦3D count: imperat. 130 214. mo"1
[389]. Pa. appoint : "30 Ah.
37 [77]- r«30 279- ™0
share 3712? Nmo 1 «■■•«** 17'.
^30? 66,12. -jri30 Ah. 144.
P30 number 214 313.
'•330 pr. n. 1413 166 3711 5310.
fcOOyDD '3 '330 4312.
.T33y '2 "330 61".
y30: y30* passive Ah. 136.
*S30 Memphis 3711 427-ullsl 832.
nyv3o 2 76-6.
yniDO month-name 81 [91] 131 291
63".
jnODO see 10D.
nD0(3) Beh. 23.
niyo pr. n. 2 270-109.
jn3 '2 >nyo 332.
nniyo pr. n. 2 32 371-17 382 404.
•T33y r3 jn3 '3 rvnyo 183 2016 25'7.
arrc '2 rvnyo [3812].
mho '2 myo 830 919 (Neh. 109).
n^yo? Ah. 114.
moo n*u noso 22s3.
rrfray nns nqpo 22106.
tbv n*i3 noso 22s8.
135
rrnoso pr. n. 22
nnoTn-i3 rvnoDo 43l^.».in.i\n[M\
wonorra rvnoso i32-4[21' is5-6-18-
18.20.22.27.29.33-36
ppdbd (=irno3o2 15s32-
j*o~(?)~2617-
p-lXO Egypt 3o'314-24 3 112 32* 387
64, 20. 66, 6. 7I«-2el27J 722-4[6-12l
xnvo 271 308 31713 374-5.
33
1"
7.12.13
111]
o7
*ntn»
298 INDEX
X10 472(71. tVBW xno 30"5.
'Kira 16s 3717 382 39* 5410 67, 7.
68, 9. 7o12 771 809 Ah. 73.
1N-1D Ah. 192. nxno 7177
Ah. [i98]i98.i99. JNiro
I*llJl.R *q1. 2.18.23 qjflll7.22
346? 2 72-10-19-2l[221. *K"lO :
38"". Drrno 346
391.2.5.
UIO pi. n. Beh. 17. N*U"lO
[Beh. 19J p. 266.
"HD: mD 271 Beh. 17 [24.25].
xmo Beh. i.3[4]5.7.8[io.i9.
20.4i]44.
"m»? pr. n. Beh. 61.
pem» month-name 177 3030 3129
[Beh. 14?].
jno? 751;3.
-1"I0: ion (2nd sing.) Ah. 148.
T1Q Ah. 105. NHTTO Ah.
105. Nnmo Ah. 188.
JNPD I51G 558-
PIPE anoint: jnC'O (perf.) 3120.
phB>D (perf.) 3020. IXTD oil
3020 3 120.
ntra measure 7117? PiriB'D mea-
surement : nnco 94. nnnpo
8*.
"JPD: Ot^O 3710? Ah. 118.
1^0 pr. n. io2-23 2273.
m« '2 i?&D Ll81-1] 2268-
flWin 'a i^e»d 4613.
D^CD pr. n. 830 918 197 2 227-87 25".
uwn 'a tbvv 618.
ion '2 nor 'a d^o io*»-"« 13s-7.
hxn '3 un '2 ohwa 2 229.
tow 'a Dbe>o 52".
rvnoao 'a d^d 2 225.
WJ» '3 D^TO 2 2109.
fro 'a otao 442.
nary 'a d^co 8isi.
ddi^c? 'a d^o 2o2-17 cf. oroo
'h? 'a.
nioB> '3 D^&yo 2221.
.Tycs? 'a D^trn 195 22119.
no^BTD pr. n. 2 282 39s 63*.
n»Dno '3 rmoa ma no^o 22".
nbwa ma no^iro 22110.
w^nt ma no^^o 22s3.
Nno Ah. [27^6 [Beh. 16.17.48].
jno pr. n. 2262-76-77 2311.
tot 'a jno 2 242.
. . .0* 'a ;no 65,3.
rP3K» 'a jno 381.
mine pr. n. 262-7 807.
nsynnno pr. n. 701.
»inn» (or ^nn«) pr. n. s16.
mmno 'a moino 13".
N3 pi. n. 24»b-M 343-4 376tI5] 68>
11.
nanw pr. n. i4.
XT33 pr. n. 221.
pMin32 pr. n. 828 916 2 8".
H13T33 pr. n. 518. name of degel
[7m] 292 352.
sum '2 »haa 518.
. . -criaa pr. n. 53°.
|W03 pr. n. 14"-" 54s-13-15.
INDEX
299
pDODUJ pr. n. 619 Ah. [33]38.4i.
45-54-56.58[59-67]7i[74-77]-
apyi33 pr. n. 2220 2623-28.
... 'a apyi33 i2n 62, 1.
"nn33 pr. n. 68, 10?
jnn 'a 'mwa 1413.
fruna 'a »jnna 1412.
l!>n33 pr. n. 28(l0' 242.
fasnnaa '3 'n^anna 2814.
n: 116.
. . 333 pr. n. [219] 323.
D33 pr. n. 8 174.
nA3 : rmu 268. -wit 26*.
.TJA3nD [Ah. 159].
JA3: |WA[r] 27". ?A3n[3] 271.
yA3 Ah. 165.166.
JOA3 2s 63s. NnA3 269-22.
p3 pr. n. 7218 Ah. [8]i8.
-113(3)? 4211.
tra 32 s.
»mena 309 318
naro pr. n. 2 2%.
mar ma nam 22107.
hdhd ma nan: 22(1,l9>-
p; : pa 454- P« 45s- "P"
455.6.
ttnau 2 62-7. xtisij 26[1-2]8.
pi3 = pA' : TOP? Ah. 9 2 [9 3].
IWlti pr. n. 2413.
fa 3714-
BTI3 copper, bronze io'° 144 I5n-13
205 2612.15.16 g0ll 3 x 10 3644 6 1 ,3
8 137. Npm Ah. 186. KH^m
8 1111.
10
ItTM 2 75-24 30
nsnai 30
nra 42". pnn"1 7i15. - nn
imperat. 427-"-8-» Ha. nn:n
imperat. 42'3. nmnmD infin.
Ah. 123. Dnninmo Ah. 122.
jnna? 8 130.
no:: vnno~ ptcp. Ah. 167.
^D3 : H^t23 1st sing. Ah. 169.
1U3 : ^nj-iDi1' Ah. 209. no im-
perat. Ah. 98. 1D30 infin.
Ah. 192. n^rv Ah. r6o.
■T1B30 watchfulness Ah. 98.
fmtMO 271.
[M]n»3 Ah. 108.
fD*3 month-name 2i[5-5]8 [4214 451 J.
D*33 pr. n. 8i62-63-72-76-79-119-121-131.
JD33 759 135 144 20" 274 315 38*
826 Ah. 66.74. pD33 3016.
N*D33 134 M6-8 1514 182 20B-8-18
346 354- 'P33 i535- ^033
136. TnD33 I519-30. H*D33
1521. di;td33 p. 265, 2.
K*T33 Ah. 139.
mn ma .0*133 8137.
N103 Ah. 118.118.119.
3D3 : 713D3 ist sing. Ah. 112.
nD3: nD3" Ah. 156. 211.
"PD3: ^D3 Ah. 119.
1D3 33".
|V3y3 I515.
3fJ?3 pr. n. 742.
-IJ?3 Ah. 79.
XD3 pi. n. ? 74 204.
nnaa Beh. 47*.
P3DDS3 pr. n. 7312.
pS3 pr. n. i66-7 3078 3 16-7.
3°°
INDEX
bt>:: n^EO (3rd fem.) Ah. 184.186.
pS3 3053i4. npEJ (1st sing.)[Beh.
1 a], nps: (3rd fem.) Ah. 135.
i39.i4o[i97]. pB3fl (3rd
fem.) 99 Ah. 124 (2nd sing.) 512.
npD: Ah. 123. pdjd^ 514.
Ha. npsjn Ah. 109. npD3n
(2nd sing.) 75. IpQjn 3016 3i15.
psjn- 13". psi" 1312. psonn
(3rd fem.) 1526.2s, ppsjn* 815-17.
pSJH imperat. Ah. 99. »pB3fl
(imperat. fem.) 827. pSODN
7 129 ? Pips:) outgoings 8328.
Nnpsj 2431-33. nnpw 721.
rips: 737-14.
tMS3 2427-30 [Ah. 189]. '•B'Si Ah.
187. *]{5>B3 76 Ah. i3o[i49]
153. r\v2>: 1318 737. mrnrB3
2718 3013.
W13V3 8 12.
*1X3? [Ah. 142].
TO3 : inVJDN Beh. 60. fnVJD
[7 116].
i?M: Ha. hun« 818 183. hwnn
(3rd fem.) 910. \-ohunn Ah. 8 1 .
H3p3 I517-20.
rr>p3 7215-16.
JOP3 [78]. N»Op3 [710].
n3 pr. n. 2 286-102.
IT"l3 pr. n. 126 381.
NB>3: flNBO Ah. 95. 71W3 (1st
sing.) Ah. in. 112. Nt^J'1 Ah.
90.[9o]. NBOn (3rd fem.)
Ah. 121. nc imperat. Ah.
121. NE>3» [Ah. 122.123].
AIT3 : JUMiT Ah. 200. JUttOn" Ah.
'33-
vyisatn pr. n. 65, 15.
. . J3J '2 myatw 219 3".
}{8>3 women : (WW 3020 342. pe>3
(our wives) 3o1B-26 3114.
|B>3 spinster? 82 io2.
pB>3 Ah. 222. ptwrtn Ah. 103
(note).
turner 173.
Din: pr. n. 345.
pr»3 pr. n. 121 2 247-100-111 335.
wi 'a pro 22s3.
pro 'a ir^a 'a pro 22111.
pro pr. n. 532 8190.
fro give. r0J"0 (2nd sing ) 31*
111 6912. }nr i6 510 614 813
1311 1530 2014 2516 303 313 423l4)8-,n
436!ni j-469j 67, 16. 7 125 8o9 Ah.
172. jn'1 8 164. jron (2nd
sing.) 2 87-12 [68, 10] Ah. [68 j
127.129. }nn (3rd sing.) 8 124.
prun (energ.) 810. rojron 1 3s.
}ri3K 57-13 821 915 114 1410 I534-36
[3510 458] 473 483 824 Ah. 61.66.
n33H3N 355. P3H3' 1 16. p31V
828-9. 13713' [212] 26* [424].
foron (2nd plur.) 66, 16.
rooron 25s. oron 2514.
pron 2511. fro3 2111131 28'0
3313. }fl3D (infin.) 816-19 96 15s
5014 64,18. rorOD 99.
fro pr. n. 87-29 917 2016 22
84.113.110
231
2 ill 2K3-3-9-17-19,21 282-2-16-17-17 ^^2
405 442 564 8i9-31-70?
INDEX
301
iTnin '3 jna 1910 22127.
ytm ['3 jna] 291141.
[ri]»nn 'a rrymn ['a jna] 2 27.
■mm* 'a fna 2816.
rwyo '3 jnj 232.
n*T3 'a jro 126.
'33y '2 |TU io20 2 212-"8 [45°].
miV '3 ?nj 832 920 1317 1537 183.
nrw: nruna [15s5].
D ssfHtD? 8i2-3-134-136.
ns*D: }ND 63s.
330: 33DD? Beh. 54.
?3D Beh. 63. VufaEP Ah. 90.
1&3DM Ah. 204. ^3DO Ah.
48.72. bi3D^ [2«]. ptanD*
Ah. 73. ^3D food Ah. 74.
h3D 434. T^D Ah. 205.
ni3D 377.
IAD: m;D (1st sing.) Ah. 13.
VTHAD Ah. to[24.65]. N1ADE
443-
HAD: nAD"1 Ah. 126.
?AD 35 c 472-7. }H1 J3D 81S io13-18.
KHA3 JAD 269-21.
PAD 2610.
n3D pr. n. 2 261-69.
iriD = "ine>? : xnnon 7 110.
X1MD (or sr) Ah. 88.
pD pi. n. 39 52-2 617 828 9" 13"
I42.S.3.12 I52 !66.7 253.4 2g2 2c>2.2
307 4i5451-2-9562. p31D 336
67,3. N^nno 24s3.
DID : HD1D Ah. 38. pDID Beh.
30-
-iriD : mnD (2nd sing.) [Ah. 175].
P*D month-name 64, 20. [Beh. 5 J.
D^STO '3 -\n"D 22".
J3DOD133 '3 1B>D3'D 619.
B>3y3*D pr. n. 177.
f3D Ah. 100.104.
i>3D: bnDn Ah. 147.
"GO: 1"DD 27s.
who pr. n. 182.
HKI^D pr. n. 67, 3.
niOD 1113 flK^D? 35s-10.
rv3p ma ntxho i1.
na ma mbo 22102.
P^d 1516 81"?
HOD: ptcp. MDDD Ah. [87J88.
rn[»]D pr. n. 35s.
*VW '3 *30D 491.
10D : piDDD 2616. ntDDD 2612-15.
DJTnBDO 2616.
noroy '3 lnoD 744.
12$>3K3D pr. n. 3029.
3nKrl3D (see also '3B>) Ah. 50.51.55.
N*3D Ah. 165. 165.166.
NDD Ah. 184.186.
DIIIDD pr. n. 8i126.
^>ayo 2611-20.
nyD: \nyD Beh. 2. 5. 13. 19. 28. 41.
[43], p. 269, 3.
2D (= 1SD) 1312.
fWBD: NJWSD 26[ll3[417-22.
prvsD 269-22.
KloySD pr. n. 4312.
"1SD writer Ah. 1f7J18f20.27j.-55.
NISD Ah. i2.42[7o]. '"ISO
212.14 I^1.0.
302
INDEX
1SD document 520 622 S16-23-26-86 9*
I023 jgs.11.21 14<.i4 [1536] 2019 2520
281417 35< 424 4313 59. snao
2ll(22J qlO {-15 ^10 gl6.18.22. 25.27. 28 qH.IG
] o8-12-13.1».20 j j 16.16 |qC.9.12.17 j . 11
j^3ll37) xg2.« 201G 2623-28 281543[6hl
458[4615]65,7,8, 18.66,8. 68,12.
naDO number [Ah. 66].
p^3-|D 429.
DnD Ah. 61. NDHD Ah. 63.69.
ID-ID: pDIDO Ah. 114.
TiD god-name [1315] 145.
DFID: lDnilD' [Ah. 157].
"1DD secret place Ah. 88.175.
HMD pr. n. 68, 8.
nnnD 354-7191 67, 9. pnnD 3712.
p-innD? 6 18.
nay 56s Ah. 51.198 [Beh. 11.19.
47]. may (2nd sing.) 910 7 119
Ah. 87 ? vnay (2nd fem.) 146.
may (1st sing.) 76 68,5? Ah.
[24]52[75] Beh. i6[36]49, P-
265. nay 41 [27s-17] 3o13-22-27
2ji2.2i geh# 2.3.4[6.9.io]io.i7.
2o[28]29[32]33[4o]43. pay
(1st pi.) 143 375 [Beh. 13.14].
nay 2622 [3312] 417 Ah. 21.134
Beh. 54. nayn (2nd sing.)
3 126 4 16. nay* 26s. nayn
[jussive 2 16]. pnayn 38s-10.
nay: 37^. nayn 263t9h0 2716
[Ah. 17] Beh. 2.4[8]io[i3.28]
3»[4°-47]» P- z69, 7- ^y
(imperat.) 2 622 Ah. 52.68.127.
['Jnnay Ah. 103. nay [21*1
38*. T>ay (ptcp. pass.) 6'
166.8 [2720] 3o1518-30 3i"-2» 69 B4
762 Beh. 6.52 (=nay). pnny
3020. nayn11 169 [2110] 26* 27*
33" [Ah. 38]. nayn* 737-
nayno 32". nTay work 21s
Ah. 127. snTay 910. "jrway
Ah. 21. 'nTay [Ah. 17 j
Dnnnny Ah. 208.
nay servant io10284-5-17 Ah. 84^96
Niay 287-9-10. -pay 304 [31
382 549 66,9. 701. nay [Beh.
38]. ^anay39'-5. Danay371541-
may (her s.) 2 83. n.nnay
[26°]. nnay I7l!5) 301-22 [321 ]
331 68, 12 821. Ah. 83.
ae» ('a) nay 81"?
may pr. n. 8i3.
innay pr. n. 822.
mar ('a) innay 8i22-23.
Dna ('a) innay 8143.
pay 2614. s-ay 2618.
pay Ah. 103. p2yb 2 6«-22
427.7.8.13.13#
nay: nay Ah. 162. nayn (2nd
sing.) Ah. 142 ?
may corn 144 2o6-12 24s9. umay
29(l2.13il7 q[9ll2 azS,
ny preposition 56-511 89-11 ns-«-4
I316 I47 15<-26-28 j6« 2 09-10 2is-8
24s4 259-16 287 29s 3o°-20-21 3i»-"-ato
355l8j 387 434l8) 505 761 8i13*?
Ah. 52.95. ■•? ny 3027 Ah.
49.64. ny v (=n ny) 31™
■
INDEX
3°3
*iy tib not yet 2 813. no longer
347- *W? 35n- ">y con-
junction 217 io11-17 347 38s 68, 3.
69s 713 Ah. 78[86]90.i3o. Beh.
59-
ny.- iany Ah. 136.
-my = n:r6y 45s.
my 15*"6. [xn]ny 82s.
ny: njr [1531] Ha. nnyn (1st
sing.) 1536. rPTJffl (1st sing.)
Ah. 50. nynn (2nd sing.)
Ah. 146. iny^ 306 316.
py 172 26s-9 2813 3o2-3-17-26 3 13 372
[382] 39' 401 [411 421] 561 579
Ah. 49. NJny 3i2f20i Ah. 70.
nny: nnnyu Ah. 99.126.167.
mjl pr. n. 24s7.
TO 347-
koh 'a nn:my 1413.
i>ny Ah. 216.
n^y Ah. 213.
nary pr. n. 8 131.
"llty pr. n. 23*.
ny: mv Ah. 99.100.143.
bw. jna ^ry 2613. wna ^ry
2620.
-»
npry Ah. i9[2o.26]6o. nnpry
Ah. 3[7].
n?y: niry 7123.
nnry pr. n. [110] 2o6-i2-i3-]T 62, 1.
63912.
bvtn 'a nnry 22129.
nny god- name 72s.
-snny pr. n. 72".
-D^y = >^by Beh. 7.
py : pry Ah. 1 5 7.2 1 3. 2 1 5. *yy
Ah. 124. ^y Ah. 169.
\niry 417. D.Tj-y [Ah. 97].
pry matter, purpose 26212.
n^y pr. n. 129.
by preposition 65-13-14 77 816-23-27 1 18-,€
I4»-3-6 Jgl9.23.29 2 ^20 266.18 &C>
2 7s &C. 2 84-6-8 qo5-7-18-23-24-26-2*-'-*
3 16.17.22 346 35< 428.13 (,g1 8 J HI &C.
Ah. 97 &c. pnx ^y Ah. 53.
64[i33]. -illbv 6B-6-8-16 28s-10-11
38362, 1. 7130. Ah.202. pnnn^y
403. yby 42* 82" Ah. 51.
t by 2621. pr ^y 23[9h3 3414.
pby Ah. 1 1 7.187. pnp ^y
[Ah. 133]. vbmby 26 w».
^y 7UI'
I I
2.9.9
I51S i73 29" 35'
4I2.642io.ioAh.[24]25[3o]57[65|
194. I^y 5s 6516 io13-18 155
28s 3026 403 413 427 477 492 504
64, 20. 725-6-50 Ah. [27]47-i03.
169.204. »a^j? 813-15-17 I3UU
146 393. *mi>y 426;i4] Ah. 54.
65.86[i38 Beh. 24]. wby
824 [446]. pb 2 62 283-13-14
30J9 387 Ah. 36. D3^y 38s-9
494. D.n'by 14s-8 2016 266 38s
424 Beh. i7[45]. U\rvby 3024.
'"by above 5s-9. n^y 511.
bvm 358 4310- ^ uPPer
part 54-6 6U 84-5 1313 25s 65, 17.
tiby above 5511. abyb Ah. 114.
.20 r-10.13 ,rl >82
nW> 32<>5io-i325«482
N^y ny
55.11.
289 [43«].
concerning it 13
3.10
304
INDEX
rnby sacrifice [2715J 3o21-28 312127.
xniby 3o2B 3 125.
^y: by 15515 30". n^y (2nd
sing.) [7*]. rbv (1st sing.) 78.
)by 166 3c9 3 18 34*. Hanphel
ni>mn (1st sing.) i5«-7-«-27. by:n
[Ah. 84]. byy? Ah. 206.
i^yjiT 4212. l^yjnn [219].
D^y (ly) 89-11 1316 147 154 20910
259-!« 287 434[al. pbyb ny
[Ah. 95}
Q'by 177 38s 772 8330 Ah. [61]. 83.
NO^y 732 Ah. 63[68]. HD^y
[422]. '-D^y = V3^>y Beh. 7.
WD^y 2813 4i«. wbv 38*.
?^y is1. r\:by 781.
y^y-. *yby Ah. 106.
Dy preposition i1 q6 26* 27*
30B.8.8.11.16 3 ,10.14 3g4 463 68, IO.
7123 Ah. [40J49f72.77J104.139.
1 40. 1 42. 1 43. 1 45. 1 60 [164 J 166
Beh. [12J19f27.27.30.31. 45. 46].
"Dy Beh. [25]26.59[6o Ah. 9J.
ivy 42* Ah. 129.173. 130J?
68, 2. n»y 8" Ah. 37.39.
40.56.164.197. [Beh. 34.35.
47J. r\r>ybn Ah. 107.154.
161.
Dy people: NDEy Ah. 94.162.
toy: 1DV Ah. 160.
soiiEy 309 3 18.
^oy: ntay (2nd sing.) 402. t&vy
402.
moy pr. n. 22105.
ioy is7-10 cf. nop.
s^y 8 11.
n:y ji"^ Ah. [19.54.59Jno.n8
[166]. my (3rd fem.) [Ah.
118]. my (1st sing.) Ah.
14.45. njj; ? Ah. 210. uy
Ah. [58.67]i2i. ^y 71s2.
rmy Ah. 105. my [Ah. 189].
Nt:y Ah. 1 1 8. 1 1 8. 1 1 9. wy 3310.
^ndd '3 Dnnnjy 73s.
io:n '2 nunmy? 53s.
^dnbd 'a "'snmy 73*.
ncroy pr. n. 74*.
*Jjy pr. n. io20 2 212-44-46l68)128 262'
3019 3 lis 384-10-11 459 66, 8 (cl
6i10?).
nnDN '2 [^jjy 22".
myo '2 ^jy 2270.
rVJjy pr. n. 620 832 920 1317 1537 183
61".
Dota 'a tbvm '2 rrojy 2o2-9-16-19.
njy see (n:y)s.
iwrvaroy god-name 2 212B.
Ti:y pr. n. 22108.
VPTtiV god-name 44s.
nzy: r\?>yn Ah. 140.
py 205. jpy Ah. 104.125. wpy
2618. ^y 2610-12-14-17-20.
jnpy? 3011 3ii».
HHB>OB> '3 ]2py II12.
inJ3py pr. n. 5410.
v\py. PjpJT 118 [359J.
smpy Ah. 85.
my mix: myo 25. mya? Ah.
184.
my west : 'b my» 87 93. my»^
INDEX
3°5
6*8*66,15. w®& 3iyo 69 1315
25T. Ntr&e> myD sunset 218.
Uiy Arab Ah. 208.
tS>2H9 pr. n.? 8i115.
pny io9-".n 42s 68> ia
rrny Ah. 204.
nny Ah. 118.
my: n]nv^ p. 269, 3. Cf. piy.
p-iy [Beh. 46]. n npiyb Beh.
[2]4[8]io.3i.38.4o[46].
my : ? imperat. niy (fem.) 8".
W»: pBfltt i68-9. xpvy [2719].
'~)t>y 814 2015 2515 2610-10-11-16-17-17
2 8". NniK'P 615 814-21 915 [4610].
pB'y 614 2611-13-16-16.
ntj>y Ah. 25.68. nt^yris 3023
[3 122]. xntry 85 9s.
ny see (ny)a.
iny : imperat. "my 95.
PTiy 816. pny 1312. xp>ny
13s.
"iny : nny (my riches) Ah. 207.
NTny Ah. 207.
P«-itu: '2 mcnny 827 916.
3 = ? 632-3-5. = j£a ? 8 13-62 &c.
•"JKQ month-name [201]. 'JlNa ?
76s.
'QNQ month-name 21 71 3715 431
721"3.
yaa Ah. 118. DnyAS (their
meeting) Ah. 89.
1A3: n-lAQ 71s1 Ah. 63[63].
riH3 pr. n. 4312.
B013 ("13) pr. n. 7Iii-i2ii6).
MM
^013 pr. n. 127 2 278-74.
"tna [Ah. 84].
nriQ pr. n. 402 [4 19].
nna govemour : -prv nns 3o1[3i1].
pnoc nna 3029. anna [Beh.
18.38].
yioona 2612.
Tia pr. n. i42-12 51* 8iui.
a^na pr. n. 70'.
DJna pr. n. 23s.
ni3T '2 D:na 23".
DJna month-name 51 141 29s 35*
5°2-
Hana pr. n. 741.
"Hna pr. n. 2418.
^DNDB pr. n. 734-9 74s-6 83'.
|n3133 '2 'DND3 1411.
n^DlDB pr. n. 284-6-8-10-11-17.
Diinoa pr. n. 617. o:nt:a 7315.
nin '2 DJnua 23s.
. . . Da '2 B-ina-irvja 7311.
^ana 'a *db 741.
pn3 'a "D^aa 5312.
P'ds [2]t6]-
DEUa pr. n. 241.
sinnaJDa pr. n. 692.
JnJBS pr. n. 24s5.
nrwoa pr. n. 66, i. 83"*.
imw 'a 'deb 245.
. . 3D3 pr. n. 65, ii.
*B pr. n. 83".
*na '2 N^a h1-9-12-14.
D*B? JO'S 379: pr. n.? 402 [42*].
X1W3 pi. n. [Beh. 31].
D133 pr. n. ? 64, 26.
X
3°6
INDEX
;6q divide: f;6a (ist pi.) 28s.
;6b3 28". ;6b half i2-3 9"
7 133? 79s 8 188. na^B 9"12.
rvbto 44a-8[l01 741. JA^Q division
28". pxbs (our div.) 28".
bl^B pr. n. 34s.
HvvB pr. n. 2216.
jwnn 'a rvhba 2280.
rbs: rbzvb Ah. 17. nr6s (ist
sing.) [Ah. 15].
neba pr. n. 8210.
1&ba pr. n. 1315.
"•tibs pr. n. 401.
Bn«» '3 »oba 2 289 [401-5].
na*n 'a ^Dba 22".
?fn» 'a *eba 237.
iTO^B pr. n. 1022.
vnx 'a rvvbs 515.
irbba pr. n. 830 917.
pri3 'a rrbba 22111.
Da Ah. 99.i23.i56[i57]i78. by
DB 218 11
rl«
28
16
DS3 515 617 8
916 I0!l I317 I412 ["I537j j84 20
25" 281B 43[6hl [45s 4615]. ^»a
Ah. 155. -JOB Ah. 97-99.
HDB Ah. 114. pDB [Ah. 100].
. . nja 'a jeb 74s.
PinnjEB month-name 2 21-121 351 503.
WSTW 'a NDEB 7313.
"•DOB pr. n. 44rs]7.
HOB pr. n. 72* 742.
avyj 'a n£a 742.
n^D 'a nca 2 269.
*dib 'a arcn 'a N»[bu]a 22™.
n>bl3B pr. n. 1313 i86 22110 2519.
y^x 'a nfy\3& 6315.
■TOP 'a rl'bua 1538.
1DB pr. n. 37" 83".
^»a '3 1DB 53*.
*3iO '3 1DB 5310.
noa [2 14]. NnDa [215].
boa: n^oa 3010. nbDD 319.
rWDDDB pr. n. 2 6tl)2-7.
n»a '3 l&ftODB 742.
DBya 429.
-iy-iya 26".
n^iyoaa pr. n. [22] 513 610 87.
pB 1516.
*7pB: npe* Ah. 192. TpB 37e
Ah. 103. Hophal? npBH 207.
JHpB [207].
nnap-ipa ? pr. n. 75*.
una 42s.
ST-IB pr. n. [Beh. 18].
mna pr. n. [Beh. 12-14].
brie 1010 144 205 2612.
Dana 1516.
W1330TB 264-8.
^nona month-name 35*.
pa Ah. 112.
tJ»3"lB pr. n. 5 111.
D3*1B pr. n. 5 19.
DIB pr. n. 8 185.
D"I3 share 45s. '•DIB 11s.
}D13 216.
DIB Persia 2621 Beh. 22[24J24.26
[27«35]36- 'Dna Beh. 7.22.
25f38.61.62. 62]. N^DID [Beh.
23].
yna: jnaa? 176.
r
INDEX
310/
pa : pna [Ah. 84].
Bns>: bhbd 173. nt^ne Ah.
208. jama 2710.
ma: maa 143.
inna Parthia. Beh. 16.
pama pr. n. 5113.
pBTYTK 'a pama 517 [73].
"inna pr. n. Beh. 53.
"prna 204 27* 306. xanma 316.
*]WQ 84 94 2619. ptra 2610-15-15-15-
18-20 c>62-2 7Q24.
-i^a: n^sn 6314.
ma pr. n. 8i103-106-113-114.
mna? 68,3.
tmna 83".
nna to open: nTlB [Ah. 162?].
jrvna 25s. nnao^ 514. nnao
Ah. 1 14.178. jnna 81110.
nna god-name n2: pr. n. 7211.
ma 84 792~4. wna 2618-20.
mama 37s. KDia^na 37"
jDnama 37s.
ni*vna pr. n. ? 6910.
r,nB 24".
do.ioi
xana 24s9 43
,[7l8
^ana pr. n. 81102.
13X? 5413-
<av: n^ax (3rd fem.) is25-29, n-av
(2nd sing.) 44 287-12. n<as
(1st sing.) 182. tint 386.
pavn (2nd sing, energ.) 1316.
na* (ptcp.) Ah. 149.
ota» ma wav 344.
n^ [Ah. 3.7.19.20.26.60].
yav dyed 158 42°.
yav finger 2620. ;yav 261C-181-.
P1V: 'jp-JV Ah. 140. piVN 8"
Ah. 139. fipn^ io>9. npnv
30" 7 15. Nnpnv 7 128. pny
446 Ah. [43]i26.i28.i67[i69]
173.
pnv pr. n. 52 68 8fi.
TOt: mm Ah. 188.
«W: ?n« 3714.
ms: jnwr 3oib-2° [31"].
nix: w»i [Ah. 57].
Nnv pr. n. [152] 184 2C3-20 2432Jl
3714 384-6ll2) 4ii[9i 67, 17. 76*-*
§92.22.55.30^
nraa 'a Nrrc 724.
nna 'a xnv 402 [419].
. . iax 'a xnx 24s.
p«S pi. n. 722-10-17. W* Sidonian.
Ah. 208.
TV: annnt 3010.
ht 3710-
a^y : na^v (1st sing.) [Beh. 35].
n^f: n£>¥D Ah. 125.
^f: Pa. n^3 3026 [3125]. |»^SO
3°1S- .
"1B3V Ah. 98. NnB3V Ah. 91.199.
nyx: jijw Ah. 168.
|»JW 8 147-48.
pyx: W 52".
N^BV pr. n. 2 293.
n^BV pr. n. 2 210«.
jax: Ha. *awn [Ah. 71]. iroasn
Ah. 49. }B5fnn (2nd sing )
Beh. 57 [58J.
x 2
}o8 INDEX
ms* pr. n. 832 920 [5213]-
*ao 'a pmby i".
. . -1QV pr. n. 24°.
|W? p«f 5512-
spy: fp¥:3K 38s. *pv sps
[215] 57 2811 [42s].
.10
3P= 458.
^3p complain: T\blp (1st sing.) 65
bp* 813. biptt io12 477
p^ 616 io18.
blp Pa. receive 373-3.
blp preposition i53B. UTV2p 38s,
blpb 817 267-23 2710 3025 3T24 32
389 434 827 Ah. [24]52.68[75].
■op: n-npi> 7 131.
bip: nbip? Ah. 134.
Ulp before 2tul12-14 65 824 io13-18 16[3]3-
5.8 204 252-3302-273i2323-5 375-9 382
4i442[2h2[453]472-75414[66, 1]
Y26-15.16.1» Ah.[9]lO.I3.[l5.23]
50-73[93]Mi[i49]203- Beh-
30. TOIp Ah. [i5J203. \TiO"7p
Ah. 50.107. f»np(?=pip)3025.
Dircnp Ah. 141. noip 3017
3810 Ah. 2[io3]. "jncnp Ah.
101 Beh. 54. Qnninp 71s.
Pip 339 378 Ah. 46. ]mpb
32s-10. pip }D 32s. pipbv
[Ah. 133].
Dnp verb: DIpTV 82s.
BHp : JBHp Ah. 95.
blp: rbp Ah. 107.
Dip: Dp 2 2120 [Ah. 4]. Dip* i526-29
42° 46s Ah. 107. Dlpn (3rdfem.)
1522. Dipn (2nd sing.) 427-13
Ah. 10 1. Dpn i5lfi 3710. lop
(imperat.) 38s. fop (ptcp.) Beh.
59- W3p^ 53G- pop* 6 115. Pa.
lo^o10. Ha.D-pnAh.^. wpr\
Ah. 173. no*pn (2nd sing.)
64, 19? Ah. 44. ncpn (1st
sing.) Ah. 23. nno*pr»
[Ah. 9J.
Nnmp 2611.
])p pr. n. 22117 67, 4?
pnv '2 mip 5a.8.u.Ui.so 6« 8«.
KDp 42s.
^Dp Beh. 9[32.47]. nbtop (1st
sing.) Beh. i3[i 4.59]. '■jrtap
Ah. 51. nn^OP Ah. 49[76].
ni?Dp (2nd sing.) 7 113. ••nni'DP
7 12°. )bup Beh. [i]3.3.5[6.
11. 20. 21. 29] 29. 33. 40 [4 1. 4 1.
43]4448. *^Dpn (2nd sing.)
Ah. 52. *n^>Bpn (2nd sing.)
[Ah. 35 J. bt2p" 7 16 [Ah. 29].
vi&apa Ah. 6 1 [68]. I^DP
3017 3 116. I^opo^ [Ah. 48].
bup (imperat.) Beh. [8] 1 8. b*UP
Ah. 71. N^op Beh. 35[47].
bllpW Ah. 62[69]. bl2p
death Ah. 46.
>ibp 722-3-8-10-13-15-17-19. pa^p
72s-5-14.
bbp: bp' Ah. 141. b*bp Ah. 38.
112.
bbp 723-4-6-7-9-11-13. )b)bp 72s-18.
Dvbp 2611.
srop? 82ls.
INDEX
3°9
mp*1 Ah. 218.
n:pn» Ah.
*Mp 15s5.
nop 205 363 42s cf. -icy.
IP 3310-
njp 3016 Ah. 84.
TDptV Ah. 196.
219. pjp 144.
nwp i5"-22-3o 46i.
N"3p pr. n. 63".
mp pr. n. i2.
-IflDp? 6910.
XDP Ah. 117.
IVp: P^JTWp 66,9.
mn.T 'a nvp n13.
nvp 293 27* 354.
xnp : nnp (2nd sing.) [74]. nnp
(1st sing.) 710. Nipx 77ho1.
ptnp* Ah. 117. tape 284-6.
w~\pv 76.
aip : 31p (imperat.) Ah. 194.
2~ip (ptcp. ?) Ah. no. Pa.
inanp Ah. 50. nnnnp Ah. 10.
2-)p> 3o28 31". pa-ip* 3025
32s. KBTpn (2nd sing.) [Ah.
54]. anpa 3i25- a*ip
a relative 59 613-13 2010 43s.
mp id. i5 1310. 31p battle
Beh. 2— 4[6.9]io[i3] 20 [28.32.
4o]43[47]. K3Tp Beh. 2[9]
10 [10. 13. 14. 19. 28] 29 [32] 33
[40.47]. ND3"ip adv.? Beh.
56.59 Ah. [41.45.48] cf. 75^.
nip happen? 71".
nnp 59 1310 20" 46°.
VP^P [751-2]-
3fc'p: la^'pn [Ah. 57].
13K>P : Ha. UB>pn 43.
^'p: ntrpS* Ah. 140. nvp adj.
Ah. 101. N^'P 6" 8s.
ncp : "]T\&p Ah. 1 26.1 28. nntpp
Ah. 159? 191
n = xnyan 615 8I4-;i 915 i5"«-"-«
201
247.10.28 25" [46'°] 68, 5.
761? 8i2-3 &c.
|DN"I? 8 1110.
C'NI beginning 61. principal n5.
KBTI io6-6. head nt?ta 1528.
ttffmn Beh. [26J38. Wl
82s.
3"l noun [211] Ah. 60 Beh. 45.
KIT)? Ah. 120. 31 adj. [Ah.
145]. Nm 301* 42s 6313 7216
8 132-33. pian 3 19. yn [2"]
3n. ^nan 307. N^nai i3
167 205 252-4 3s3 5414.
nan verb Ah. 2. Nan Ah. 18.
naY io4-6 11
2.5
nan ptcp. 1 1;
Pa. 8 147-48? JV3-1 (1st sing.) Ah.
[23325. nivai [Ah. 8J.
JV31 (2nd sing.) [Ah. 44].
n3*r Ah. 114. •ann (2nd
sing.) [Ah. 137]. >a~lJ 8 170.
N'3"l interest? 42s. "OIE n7.
nmo II3-5. N7V31E IO«-c
67,10? nn^lO 10*.s.n.n.u-u.^
II8-9 65,1.
K*3*1 Ah. 38.4i[46]54.56.58.59[67.
71.74]. '31 80s Ah. 33.
Wl [Ah. 65].
nanan? 75'-7-
AA~i: Ann (2nd sing.) Ah. 136.
;$io INDEX
>An : tal Ah. 206. 1^1 Ah.
123. nbx-\ [Ah. 196]. DnSai
Ah. 122. Titan 30" 3 115
Ah. 80. atari? Beh. i[4.io].
•J'A-i: BWV Ah. 29.
HI : nm (1st sing.) 164.
nn: mnn (3rd fem.) Ah. 189.
nn Ah. 168.
in pr. n. 1 s.
inuN 'n ban (or bn) 220.
on: on' Ah. 150. onrvPAh.
*38- D1 Ah. 142^49]
150?
in [Ah. 141].
xni pi. n. Beh. 27*.
bam pr. n. 8 iM.
am : ^om Ah. 5 1 . ne-m Ah. 1 1 .
Ti»n-i 81*-" [138]. jncm 25s.
Drrv Ah. 153 [157]. pn-i^
[337]« IPI"1 friendship 302
3 12 3s2. jonnn 182 2511-14.
T»n*1 friends 3 o24 31 23 Ah. [141]
176. DTn Ah. 115. ncm
Ah. 92. pom Ah. 53.223.
cma Ah. 107. ncm gift
97 433-. nn»m love of her
Ah. 91.
yiom? pr. n. 5" CIS 154, 7.
pnn : nprn (istsing.) i37-16 146 2 54
43U-8J 67> 5- (2nd sing.) [4212].
PTI1 stranger i6 59 613-13 1310 43s.
removed 615 1411 2015 417 [Ah.
194?] jpTn 209 28U.
DniD renunciation 622 82S-25 1414
»520[43ls66,i4].
231: 33~1K [Ah. 204J ptcp. 331
Ah. 38. pblD '331 Beh. 30
[45]- T331 Ah. 205. Ha.
33-in Ah. 191. naann (2nd
sing.) Ah. 128. 331HD (2nd
sing.) Ah. 126.
T»3*l Ah. 100.105.
nD*3i? 8 129.
^3n: N^3-| 384. ltall? Beh.
55-
PI [Ah. 94
VOI pr. n. 34s.
NJ»-| Ah. i65.i65[i66].
y-| : njn Ah. 222. py-i Ah. 113.
my-| pr. n. 833 921.
ms '3 myn 2 2ns.
nn3T '3 rmyi 2310.
'in 7q6-13-13-15-17.
N*y-| pr. n. 343.
na ni3 nti 22s6.
b^yi pr. n. 1539.
NS1: ptcp. rlKSI Ah. 100. }1DT
Ah. 154.
ypi : fypi 2614. anyp-i 2620.
pp^: JP1T Ah. 133. -jipT [Ah.
148].
KBH see B>N"1.
»en 824. nam 2512. n&n
(1st sing.) [35»]. vnvn
35". irvtm [453].
D3rW1 (1st sing.) 2512. ptn
200-16. l^EH 289. D3rt5n
2o4-7. nBH"1 826. *aam» 812
139 43te.6]io> D3t?"V 2515.
13BHK 913. *33KHK 820 434[9].
IND
311
])W\S 20n-13-H-14 2514.
2o11-13. nena 25'° 289.
ptcp. ntjn 445. ncnob 28s.
nVkT> 2617.
yen: xy'cn Ah. 171. jyjjn Ah.
168.
xm Ah. 177.
B> [26]. = !?p{5> II2-3 2 2ri12 &C.
353 509 6i13-15 632? 69 D 78s
8i18-31 &c. — ration 24[1'2 &c.
= J"W 241 &c.
W Ah. 77. r6xt> Ah. 11.
n^Nt?? 475. r&*M0 (istsing.
pass.) 163 [45s]. Dr6w 20s.
bw 302 312 [38s] 401 [Ah. 119].
iW [171 i32] 372 391 411 561.
'Ml^NtJ" 65, 8. ^X5? imperat.
169. K^KB> 76. n£>NB>» 764.
^Xtf Sheol 7 115.
>3Kt5> (=»N3B>?) Ah. 174.
,3X55' Ah. 206.210?
1X2' : 8x61-63. 77.106.118. 131. 132# "\Xn&*
119. rvw [2718] 3011 [3110].
H3B>: D*3E> 159.
D2B> month-name 281.
»2ti> capture : ]V3K> (2nd sing.)
7 114. K'at? captives 7114.
nta 'a mn ma rp3e* 22s5.
y3B> be filled : ny3K> (2nd sing.)
Ah. 127.129. jane* Ah.
189.
y2£> seven : fy3B> seventy 2611-15.
r\v2V [2i6-8].
innsy 'a ns?3B> 822.
p2V 6912 ? Ah. 90. p2V (imperat.)
Ah. 171. np3C (2nd sing.)
Ah. 176. -\r\p2V (istsing.)
Ah. 175. Ip365> Ah. 162.
Wip2*J> 69s. fp3C 271. P3C'
5415- p3L"n (2nd sing.) 4211.
Jp3t2>X Ah. 82. [ip3B* 546.
\>2wJ? Ah. 193. fpat? (picp.)
[2713] 3023 3 123.
TOP pr. n. 58s.
un (nna) top 8i24-25.
n^n (rna) top 81127.
ww (ms) TOP 8 19.
X*T33 '2 TOP 221.
nroy ma dtop 813.
XAP: Ha. XAPnn (2nd sing.) Ah.
137. rVAPil [Ah. 9 J. UP
411. XUP [172] 2719 302 [382]
412 421 [5411] Ah. 29.5i[58J74.
io6[i65] Beh. 60. KXP 54s.
JllOAP? Ah. 87. JKUP Ah.
[ii]5o.ii6. Beh. 51.
-pP: "pPiTD 379.
yjp Ah. 165. nnnpx 3s4.
inp verb: VJHP 82s.
Trip noun 516-19 617~21 829-34 917-22
io21 j 219.19 !g39 j 34.5.5.3 2o17-18
2816.16.16 43[12.12)12 46fl2-14]l4 65, ZI
Ah. 140. KmP 18 219 3" 515
828 pie IQ21 XI 11.16 t317 I412 j gS7
184 2517 28'5 4311 4612 495.
[JTlP Ah. 168.
NIP pr. n. 401.
nna? ra nip 2315.
HIP to be equal to : Pitt? (ptcp.)
312
INDEX
xpv
WW 381
,^.9.11.11.18, n«)p j5l2#
15". piJHW 282.
^P bed? is18.
pip 82*? Np*»P 512-14.
13".
mp 27s. N11P 2 79.
na 'a nw 220 [3**].
3TP : T3fP Ah. 46
roam 54s.
-inp 374.
DnP: Niphal? ptcp. DnP3 1510
p<np 4210.
want? pr. n. 731S.
dup 'a want? 7310.
nnp: pnnp* Ah. 155.
JBDP 42s.
nt3P document
SHOP 8 114.
nOP side 55.
25M.M.
a^p: ap Ah. 6.17
[26]35-
raw pr. n. 452.
CP: nDP (2nd sing.) Ah. 94 (1st
sing.) Beh. 35. i:o^ 302
[3 12]. D^Pn (2nd sing.) Ah.
130. J^P1 Ah. 115. WP>?
69 B. tW ptcp. 3810.
dj?d cp 2 622-23-25. nra^p Ah.
95. DH6W 2721 Ah. 80.
wyi& amount 3810.
D*P noun 2610-19.
nn^ [2718] 3011 [3110].
nap: Ha. napn 3o143i13. nnapn
(2nd sing.) 427-8. nnapn (ist
g 15.16.17.19.20.22-26,
|» 10P except
N3P Ah.
sing.) 135 Ah. 76. inapn
38*: jnapn 45. napn*
[Ah. 85]. PDPnn (2nd sing.)
Ah. 34. napn (2nd sing.)
I09.io.n pnapn^ 387. jinapn
3710 [Ah. 66]. nanPN 2 72-".
lnanps 34ri14-
nap [2 17].
nbp [Ah. 22].
ni^P pr. n. 39lW.
DI^P pr. n. 238 2518 [352j 6310.
nmin 'a di^p 441.
nnar 'a d^p 22s6.
nmo 'a di^p 2220.
DOI^P pr. n. i2 202-17-19 4611.
[rrojin 'a de^p 4618.
nnry 'a ddi^p i10 2o6-12-13.
n^p 'a u&bw 462t8].
n^P [261] 307 318 403 64,20 Beh.
38. nn^P (2nd sing.) 415.
nn^P (ist sing.) 168 [26s] 542
Beh. [7. 15. 18] 25.26. in^P
26« 3019 5415. fn^p 3o18-29-29
3I17.28, f^ffH [494j Ah. 62.
^:^^p, Ah. 201. rbmt 4i3-
n^P (imperat.) 3810 4 210-10.
n^p (ptcp.) 38s. jn^p 173.
n^p 2 13 26s. n^np"1 26421
[27"] 3024. nn^PD Ah. 98.
Pa. inf. nrW>? 49s- Ha.
nrfcpn? 67,2. n^pnn?4o4.
D^P: t^P (ptcp.) 216-17 [319].
tyfpp gu.« 811 96-11 io16 286 467.
ntt^p 89 99 1518. JD^P 97-1(U:!
io8.
INDEX
\b& Ah. 130.
D^C: Pa. pay rxbv (1st sing.) n7
i72 296 [357] 82s. *\T\tbw
I07.ii.w. 10^ I0ifi, p^
422. D^BTI (2nd sing.) [Ah.
131]. VHO^CK iiS-b.io.
|O^B>K 355 64, 27? D/CN
[29*]. p»^c ioin. rvcbvh
135: greet? [Ah. 110]. D^PO
ir. nniobcD Ah. 131.
D^ welfare 171 212 301 34' 37[lj2
382 291-s 4o[lh-1 4i[l)8 421 5410
571-1-8 65, 4- 66, 9. 67, 1 1. 68, 1,8.
69 C [701] 771 Ah. 1 10.120.
l^tT 4i2-3-5-7 561 581-2? *3K)bw
391- KJtD^ 574-
D^C pr. n. 1320 i94-6 2241-85-88-97-116.
rrwin '3 tbv 519.
ron '2 cbw 2 239.
;nj 'a tbw 2816.
rPE^>C pr. n. 3029 3 128.
31B* '2 TPtb& 2 224.
b&X '2 DD^C 491-
\*Sxbw pr. n. ? 8 12.
DC Ah. 85.85.138.138. DC3 812
139 i48,9[2o12] 2512-13434[6-9)l0474.
<10C Ah. 170. >»C3 614 816
2512.13. iQ& Ah. 141. "]DC3
3026 31". HDC 2 84-5-9-13 331-5
66,1. Ah.i.5[8]i8. Beh.2[4]7.
I2.l7[l8.l8]22.25.27*.[3I.35.
38.61]. pC3 30293i28. nnoc
221 342-4 66, 1. tsnnriDP
[66, 1] Ah. 116.
♦BW3 '3 IDC 26821.
^3
niDC pr. n. 2 22'-28 [2 47].
^n '2 yicc \2\
ota '3 viae 2241.
pDC Ah. 95. Kn3C [2 715J 302-"-M
311*1" 324 38l2l3-° 401 [Ah.
116J.
yoc 7i1(1. nycc (2nd sing.)
[Ah. 98]. nycc (1st sing.)
402 4 12-2 [Ah. 21.76]. lyoc
[Beh. 8.39]. ycc Ah. 93.
yecn (2nd sing.) [Ah. 132].
*jjyDC3 Ah. 59. ycc (ptcp.)
Ah. 29. yEC (imperat.) Beh.
53. iy»B* (imperat.) Ah. 59.
y»onc« Ah. 70. ycnc1 18s.
jron^ [Ah. 62].
WW pr. n. 8i8-17-19[20].
vin 'a py»c 8115.
1319 19s
22
26. IIS
rpyroc pr. r
24s 5212.
ycin '3 rvycc 5".
un 'n rryroc 33s.
fMT '3 .TyEC 831 919.
D^C '3 iTytDC 196.
"IOC: 1»nCK (imperat.) Ah. 97.
1 01. "l»nc? Ah. 125.
P"1»C pi. n. 3029.
C»C 68-9 86 1315 256-7 67, 13? Ah.
92. 93. 108. 138. 171.
218.
f3^3 '3 nACOC 24'4.
l^CDC pr. n. 26(4'8.
'"nX'OC pr. n. 1 112-
'nDC pr. n. 8i'«.
KCCC
.','4
INDEX
XIV. nNJB> (ist sing.) is23-27.
-px;cn (3rd fem.) 98. *mbp
(ptcp.) [Ah. 176]. ntaw
divorce 1523 181. nnXJK' his
hatefulness Ah. 132.
p])B> pr. n. 2219.
nW change: ronBTI Ah. 201.
n^year: io7. TUV i1 21 51 61
71 81 91 io1 118 131 141 [151]
r 62.2.6.8 j^7 201 2I3 221 2^34135144
2gi.i 262S 272 281-1 291-5 3o4-19-21-30
3,4.1M9 327 35!.6 [42» 431] 451
g03.5 6112 631-8-15 64, 20, 24.
66, 16. 67, [i]io. Nr>3B> 213
7114 g 139-112 jjp 4&8 7I9#
t31JB> pr. n. 73'°.
Tnxmc pr. n. Ah. 3.4-4-[5-1^5-
2 7 [47]. See also 'niD.
n"J^? pr. n. 462.
}JB>? 1516.
nJB> to tattoo: n^ty (ptcp. pass.)
2 84-6. nn'W tattooing 284-6.
pyB> 2[3-4]5-7-8 34l6) 45 io10 [2438J 3314
35 c 458 492 64, 18. 66,4.
sp 2(5n.i9#
nBB' :- nniBB' Ah. 132. nia^ [Ah.
154
DBV 527. DSt^ [Ah. 145].
BBtJTl (2nd sing.) [Ah. 143].
PBSB* Ah. 104. DD^J 52s.
iTBDE> pr. n. 5214.
^W. pSB> Ah. 113.
!?Bt?: W (ptcp.) [Ah. 150].
^BE^n* Ah. 150. f?D^n
(imperat.) [Ah. 149].
ystT: fy^DP [Ah. 74].
TX>: TQ^ Ah. 108 [159]. HTS'J'
8 133 Ah. 92.
pB> Ah. 103? fppp 3015-20 3i14-19.
Npa>: Ha. jpptpnb 2 77.
KpB> see pHK.
B. 10.11. 13. 24 22122
fa I512'12
io3 [n2]
: = |bpB> :
15s
29l3lG 357.9 35c 362.3 36b.b 43::
67, l6. 785.
mp: me* 717.
xnnc 722-3-10'12^13-17-18-24.
niv: [Nnjimt? Ah. 170. nnvrw
Ah. 85.
ypin n[-i3 n]nc 2 24.
epP: ISIS? 3012 3 1".
pn^ Ah. 100. pnv 403.
intj': -int? 303 313. ttir\w
702.
'B>B> pr. n. 491.
^-ins* 'a fron^ 51S [1318}
nntf six 433. \rw 2d12.
nnB> drink : nnty Ah. 93. rWBTl
(2nd sing.) 7 122. in:j»n 2 17.
nnts> (ptcp.) [Ah. 92]. \*m
(ptcp.?) 27s 3021 3 120.
pn^: pn£>N Ah. 121.
nn&> Ah. 125.
K2n pr. n. 284-5-12 73s 8iu.
N'bn 26s.
pn Ah. 112.
-an : nan 309. inn'' Ah. 106.
Tan Ah. 109. pan 26ls.
1An pi. n. Beh. 2.
INDEX
3*5
3in: nnn (3rd fern, jussive?) 1523.
2W [Ah. 65]. 3inK 455-
Ha. n*nn 207. -njTnrr Ah.
126. Aph.? i3nN 34°. Nam
reward Ah. 44. 31 n (adv.)
i7 912.
thn pr. n. 632.
win; Da^ins 2 19.
-iin 3310.
min? 8210.
ainn: "Dinn 67 i313. vrioinn 85
2548 66,13.
ninn month-name 61 io1 n$ 251
8 1122. ninn god-name 69°.
DUnn pr. n. 342? 392 65, 7.
nnn 2612. .Tnnn 610 84-6 25s-6.
NTinn 1313.
njDTi Ah. 134.
NVISTI 27s.
n'n? pr. n. 3713.
,i:on 156. Cf. Nah. 210.
^ri: ^ns 8 139. *nj$>nn 7119.
DiT^n 308.
nn^n 2 610-11-15-15-15-18-20
w6n Ah. 92.
non s4 25s 27
15[l7l
3°
Ah. 39.
38s 772 Ah. 48.72.
*non 1512.
lion month-name 304-19.
D'On 2 613-20.
paon 2610-14.
snon 81111.
run 4,; 274 3o5-24-27 3i5-2a-2" 34T 372
548 69 D.
pan second io7 6313.
pan dragon Ah. 106.
Uiyn month-name [214] 4214 67, 1.
68, 11. ■ayn 831.
rfcan? 8 130.
HDBn 551-
Nmipn pr. n. 68, 1.
b?r\: ^W 7*6- Wl (3rd
fern.) 1524. ^pn = bpv 10"'.
s*3^o n^-pnD 281]. d-id n^pno
2621.
nnn pr. n. i63-s-9.
pnn 268-u-12-1418-19 8211 Ah. 56.58.
62f67.69.77]. pnnn Ah. 92.
N^AT snin3 Beh. i [io].
Dnnn [38s].
■jin: rusnn*? 65, 13. nmanni'
15s0 [46s].
ynn 53 Ah. 44. Nynn 5"-".
jynn 3o93i9. rrjnn Ah. 168.
D"lt2ETI pi. n. 2439U31 27s'.
nBTl month-name 151 [Beh. 32].
APPENDIX
The following three fragments of papyrus found at Sakkara, were
published by Mr. Noel Giron in the Journal Asiatique, vol. 18 (1921),
p. 56. His text and translation are reproduced here by his kind
permission, but for further information the reader is referred to his
article.
Fragment A is part of a list of names, all Egyptian. In 1. 4
"P'BDS, cf. 742.
A
I
. . . ton nNDoro -q »amn 1
. . . ye-inon ton isa na -n . x . . 2
. . . d"b-ijvj ton mam in ... . 3
. . . TON ^IPODB "13 4
1 Hor(-en)-Kheb b. Nakhamsakh (?), whose mother is . . .
2 .... or b. Nofo (?), whose mother is Ta-te-Hor-pee . . .
3 b. Wahpre, whose mother is Nethre'tis . . .
4 b. PSMSK(?), whose mother is . . .
Fragments B and C form part of one document, but apparently not
the same as A, though the writing is similar. Mr. Giron has ingeniously
fitted them together and suggests that they represent government
accounts. He points out that in 1. 6 N^n mJD (cf. Ezra 413) is ' tribut
de la colonie', not a contribution for religious purposes as in No. 22.
There was therefore a colony (N^n), military or otherwise, at Memphis
(cf. 37" 427, &c, 83*) as at Elephantine. There is nothing to show that
it was Jewish or even Semitic.
1 8
APPENDIX
ro
m *©
t— CO
o -
a
c
cq
n n
o o i —
tr tr n
o
n n i —
r r
n
o
n
r
n
o
a-
n
r
cr —
r _rx
£> r
fr = =
fr -
ix
i i
I — I
= r
c
n
r
I*
o
o
ii.
♦ £
i i -J^
£- r
n
£3
n
n
c
U
ft
n
o
APPENDIX
319
o
E
3
co
co
CO
<u
<u
/v.
l— I
E-
CO
E-
.s
_3
J3
<U
<L>
1/3
o
o
<u
10
a!
J3
(U
CO
in
co .J3
.3
c
3
C
•~^
•
>co
>co
>co
OS
rt
rt
i~,
Sh
>-.
L_i
<U
V
<u
^
^
J*
O
u- .
lw
l*.
0
0
0
&
s
6
s •
3
3
3
•
CO
CO
CO
in
in
CO
CU
CU
co
o~
>co
l-H
£
3
CO
.3
CU
CU
CO
>co
6
3
co
to
-o
O
<u
-c
CO
CU
CO
3
O
JS
<u
<u
t-
O
co
<u
M '5
CU
CU
.3
CO
co
+
CU
co
in >o
00
On
o «
PRINTED IN ENGLAND
AT THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY FRE3d
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11